18 · Survey Results: Executive Summary
Notes
1. Ricky Erway and Jennifer Schaffner, “Shifting
Gears: Gearing Up to Get into the Flow. “
www.oclc.org/programs/publications/
reports/2007-02.pdf, 2
2. Richard Pearce-Moses, Glossary of Archival and
Records Terminology (Chicago: Society of American
Archivists, 2005).
http://www.archivists.org/glossary/
3. Mark Greene and Dennis Meissner, “More Prod-
uct, Less Process: Revamping Traditional Archival
Processing,” American Archivist 68, no. 2 (Fall/Win-
ter 2005): 208–63.
4. Karen T. Lynch and Helen W. Slotkin. Processing
Manual for the Institute Archives and Special Collec-
tions M.I.T. Libraries (Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1981).
Ruth B. Bordin and Robert M. Warner, The Modern
Manuscript Library (New York, 1966).
5. One comment regarding this was seen in re-
sponse to the entry “Notes from Spring MARAC
meeting: MPLP, Friend or Foe?” in the popular
blog ArchivesNext. On May 9, 2008, a commenter
named Paul wrote that Greene and Meissner are
“innovative thinkers that aren’t afraid to rattle
cages.” Here is one example of this: “An unfortu-
nate tendency on the part of processing archivists
is to use the preparation of these text notes as an
excuse to demonstrate their own knowledge (of
both collection and historical context) and writing
ability. Perhaps this is an attempt to demonstrate
professionalism but, if so, it is a misguided one
that further reduces processing productivity.”
Greene and Meissner, 247.
6. Society of American Archivists, Describing
Archives: a Content Standard (Chicago: Society of
American Archivists, 2004).
7. Bureau of Canadian Archivists, Planning Com-
mittee on Descriptive Standards, Rules for Archival
Description (Ottawa: The Bureau, 1996).
8. Elizabeth Yakel and Jihyun Kim, “Adoption and
Diffusion of Encoded Archival Description,”
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
and Technology 56, no. 13 (2005): 1427–37.
Notes
1. Ricky Erway and Jennifer Schaffner, “Shifting
Gears: Gearing Up to Get into the Flow. “
www.oclc.org/programs/publications/
reports/2007-02.pdf, 2
2. Richard Pearce-Moses, Glossary of Archival and
Records Terminology (Chicago: Society of American
Archivists, 2005).
http://www.archivists.org/glossary/
3. Mark Greene and Dennis Meissner, “More Prod-
uct, Less Process: Revamping Traditional Archival
Processing,” American Archivist 68, no. 2 (Fall/Win-
ter 2005): 208–63.
4. Karen T. Lynch and Helen W. Slotkin. Processing
Manual for the Institute Archives and Special Collec-
tions M.I.T. Libraries (Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1981).
Ruth B. Bordin and Robert M. Warner, The Modern
Manuscript Library (New York, 1966).
5. One comment regarding this was seen in re-
sponse to the entry “Notes from Spring MARAC
meeting: MPLP, Friend or Foe?” in the popular
blog ArchivesNext. On May 9, 2008, a commenter
named Paul wrote that Greene and Meissner are
“innovative thinkers that aren’t afraid to rattle
cages.” Here is one example of this: “An unfortu-
nate tendency on the part of processing archivists
is to use the preparation of these text notes as an
excuse to demonstrate their own knowledge (of
both collection and historical context) and writing
ability. Perhaps this is an attempt to demonstrate
professionalism but, if so, it is a misguided one
that further reduces processing productivity.”
Greene and Meissner, 247.
6. Society of American Archivists, Describing
Archives: a Content Standard (Chicago: Society of
American Archivists, 2004).
7. Bureau of Canadian Archivists, Planning Com-
mittee on Descriptive Standards, Rules for Archival
Description (Ottawa: The Bureau, 1996).
8. Elizabeth Yakel and Jihyun Kim, “Adoption and
Diffusion of Encoded Archival Description,”
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
and Technology 56, no. 13 (2005): 1427–37.
