(Fwd) Re: collections/records are in the act of ....

[Chris J. Durden]

Michael,
    My beef is with the attenuation of meager curatorial funds by new 
obligations of technological fixes for newly obsolete methods of data storage.
    Technology should be used to create permanent records that do not need 
to be updated! Printed records fill this need perfectly. Records that 
should be permanent must never be stored on transient media alone.
    The first rule is - make a printed label for the specimen.
A bar-code may be added for convenience, but may not always be readable.
    The second rule is - make a printout of the catalog for the archive!
The electronic database or the media on which it is recorded may not be 
always readable.
    The third rule is - publish your catalog.
Several libraries will save your published catalog. Your own institution 
may lose it.
    The fourth rule is - don't let the salesman sell you the Emperor's New 
Clothes.
Expensive vapor-ware and the equipment to run it on may bankrupt the 
institution and create another orphan collection!
............Chris Durden

At 08:39 PM 7/31/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Chris,
>
>In reading your message below, I think the only thing you disagree with
>is my initial statement which was "I agree that scanning and electronic
>documentation of specimens is a >valuable undertaking; that is if we
>assume that the collection catalogue >has already been data-based (a
>valuable neologism)."
> >
>But my next sentence was:
> >But as you say the permanency of electronic data is in question for
> >various reasons.
> >
>With which I think you agree.
>
>We are seeing more and more papers that reference web sites as the
>authority for some statement, with little assurance that the web site
>has valid information (although that probably goes for many books as
>well) or with no guaruntee of permanency (although library permanency
>may be an illusion as well).
>
>I'm sure it's as true for insects as it was for birds, but European
>museum collections didn't escape WW-II unscathed.
>
>Mike Gochfeld
>
>
>
>Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:05:06 -0500
>To: leps-l at lists.yale.edu
>From: "Chris J. Durden" <drdn at mail.utexas.edu>
>Subject: Re: collections/records are in the act of ....
>Reply-To: drdn at mail.utexas.edu
>
>Michael,
>     I disagree. As biological curators we do not need additional
>obligations of equipment maintenance and conservation. Printed and
>written
>records have served us well for several thousand years. I see no reason
>to
>abandon that format now.
>     Electronic methods of data storage and access have provided us with
>magnificent tools for data capture, manipulation, standardization,
>matching, recognition that is fast. They have not provided us with a
>century standard of international data preservation. I think it is
>wonderful to publish a data-filled report using current state-of-the-art
>technology, but, without a companion printed permanent record
>(illustrated
>book) this is ultimately a non-publication because stored copies that
>are
>decades old or centuries old will be unreadable with the
>state-of-the-art
>technology of that future time.
>     I too have a Kallikac-style shed full of defunct equipment, but I
>have
>maintained an operating thread of data transcribability from CP/M and
>OS/9
>to WindowsME. I feel that I have squandered a lot of time that would
>have
>otherwise been devoted to descriptive science, just trying to use modern
>methods. I have also spent the equivalent of several specimen cabinets
>filled with Cornell drawers and unit trays while following the wild hare
>of
>computerization. Maybe I can recoup some of this on E-Bay when I sell my
>Osborne schematic chart that is signed by Adam Osborne.
>.........Chris Durden
>
>At 05:04 AM 7/31/2001 -0400, you wrote:
> >Harry,
> >
> >I agree that scanning and electronic documentation of specimens is a
> >valuable undertaking; that is if we assume that the collection
>catalogue
> >has already been data-based (a valuable neologism).
> >
> >But as you say the permanency of electronic data is in question for
> >various reasons.
> >
> >I have large quantities of data on punch cards (but alas, no punch card
> >reader). I have 8" floppies for my PDP-8 which languishes in my son's
> >basement.
> >
> >I have 5 1/4 inch floppies filled with text and data generated on a
> >CPM-based operating system which we were assured in 1980 would be the
> >state of the art.
> >
> >If you bought beta-max you know what I mean.
> >
> >Yesterday I went to order a new laptop with a very fast CD-rom drive
>and
> >was told that was on it's way to be obsolete.
> >
> >So electronic media really need to be curated as vigorously as the
> >specimens themselves.
> >
> >Mike Gochfeld
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>
>
>
>
>
>---End of forwarded mail from drdn at mail.utexas.edu



 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl