31 May
2005
31 May
'05
5:11 p.m.
On Tue, 31 May 2005, Randy McLaughlin wrote:
I think that a museum or other true archivist should do only those
modifications and replace only those parts necessary to keep the machine
operational, and then the replacement parts should be clearly
identifyable as such. This would seem to agree with what is done to other
mechancial artefacts in museums (e.g. clocks).
However I am not an archivist, nor do I claim to be one (and nor, to be
honest are many of the people on this list). I use my machines. I
therefore feel it's reasoable to make modifications to make them more
useable.
However, I make those modifications as reversable as possible (I would
rather not cut a PCB track, but sometimes there is no other way, for
example). And I don't make them if I don't have to (which is what this
darn thread started off about).
-tony
Many PC boards have had mods that are later
reversed. Anyone looking at the
repaired boards can see that it was done to put the board back to the
original state, the same can not be said if a screw is replaced.
I'm assuimg the context here is that the modifications are being done by
the archivist (if not then someone is mixing their arguments).