[iDC] shelf life

Craig Bellamy txt at craigbellamy.net
Sat Nov 17 13:02:41 UTC 2007

Hi Simon,

You make a strange and rather reductive argument that appears to be 
based on a one page form. Up to 50% of all research output in the 
humanities in the UK has some form of digital output. This has very 
little to do with a one-page form nor the AHDS.  And it isn't a matter 
of incorporating 'electronic resources' into research. In most cases, it 
is research in itself. Sure we don't like Bureaucracy and the other 
burdens of modernity (like computing itself); but I am sure you wouldn't 
hesitate in taking public money (obligation free of course).


Simon Biggs wrote:
> The case of the AHDS is a good one to illustrate this discussion. The AHDS
> was successful in part due to the Art and Humantities Research Council
> requiring that all electronic resources associated with the outcomes of
> research it supported was lodged with the AHDS. This also involved
> completing a fiddly form as part of the funding application in the first
> place. Many people simply chose to not have an electronic outcome of the
> research so as to avoid this extra layer of bureaucracy in the funding
> submission and project management process.
> Now that the AHRC has suspended the requirement for such material to be
> lodged with the AHDS we might see many more people incorporating electronic
> resources into their research outcomes. This is ironic, as it would seem the
> obligation to archive functioned to deter people producing anything to be
> archived.
> Regards
> Simon

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 

More information about the iDC mailing list