Message-Id: <mailto:199408270523.AAA16263@library.wustl.edu> Date: Thu, 25 Aug 1994 21:57:33 EDT From: Mike Riley <mailto:MikeMAPS@AOL.COM> Subject: Re: Re[2]: More digital resolution... To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB <mailto:IMAGELIB@ARIZVM1.BITNET>
While I agree that life expectancy is a vital issue in regard to "archival" quality, I don't believe it is the only one. Archival quality microfilm, for example, can be described in terms of the RLG (Research Libraries Group) guidelines, which describe in detail the quality issues both bibliographic and technical which must be taken into consideration when producing an archival image record which will be viable (and scannable) 500 years from now.>Archival vs. Life Expectancy...
>I agree with the previous comments. Of course, we'll have >some standards
group >(in some cases including a good many well intentioned >non-users) that will
>disagree with the idea of change.
>Life Expectancy (it's a clearer description)
Mike Riley Sr. Systems Analyst Preservation Resources