Search results

This paper seeks to suggest ways of understanding the relationships between records and documents.

The paper reviews some of the statements made about records and documents in professional literature. It also offers some thoughts on the connections between records and documents in digital and pre‐digital environments and their intersections with other concepts such as “data”.

Although professionals have often seen records and documents as closely intertwined, this paper argues that the record and the document follow different logics. Documents are characterised by their format, records by their relation to activities, events or other temporal occurrents. Records need not be in documentary form, and can exist at multiple levels of aggregation. The notion that documents become records when they are “declared” is problematic. Capture and declaration do not determine record status, but if capture systems are robust they allow the power of the record to be harnessed to the fullest possible extent.

The paper seeks to explicate some basic concepts of the professional discipline.

By reconsidering the concept of the historic environment, the aim of this study is to better understand how heritage is expressed by examining the networks within which the cultural performances of the historic environment take place. The goal is to move beyond a purely material expression and seek the expansion of the cultural dimension of the historic environment.

Conceptually, the historic environment is considered a valuable resource for heritage expression and exploration. The databases and records that house historic environment data are venerated and frequented entities for archeologists, but arguably less so for non-specialist users. In inventorying the historic environment, databases fulfill a major role in the planning process and asset management that is often considered to be more than just perfunctory. This paper approaches historic environment records (HERs) from an actor network perspective, particularizing the social foundation and relationships within the networks governing the historic environment and the environment's associated records.

The paper concludes that the performance of HERs from an actor-network perspective is a hegemonic process that is biased toward the supply and input to and from professional users. Furthermore, the paper provides a schematic for how many of the flaws in heritage transmission have come about.

The relevance here is largely belied by the fact that HERs as both public digital resources and as heritage networks were awaiting to be addressed in depth from a theoretical point of view.