Will people remember this 50 years from now? It sounds like a stupid analogy, but what if some kid does a masters on computer front panels 50 years from now, and inspects some PDP-11s... Most people do not know this, so I do not blame you. It is common museum practice when restoring objects. It does not have to be fancy - you could even scratch it in with a diamond engraver. I applaud that you accept the idea, because I know of several others that have been downright offended by the thought. Why? I still do not know. William Donzelli aw288 at osfn.org

In article <44480ECB.2020409 at yahoo.co.uk>, Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk at yahoo.co.uk> writes: I wonder what the curators at the Henry Ford Museum do as a matter of practice. Lots of curator "practice" comes from art and antique museums where you definately don't want to "repair" anything. Witness how on Antiques Road Show they point out that the value is less if its a piece of furniture that has been refinished. However, the Henry Ford Museum tries to preserve technological artifacts in working condition and I'm willing to bet that they have a different set of rules than the average museum for how an item is to be restored. Has anyone ever contacted them for discussion? -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>

In article <444824A6.2020503 at yahoo.co.uk>, Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk at yahoo.co.uk> writes: Yeah, I like the idea of keeping a log for each chunk of equipment so that you have written down what you've done to it and what needs to be done. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ: <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/> Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty <http://pilgrimage.scene.org>

I have made simialr comments in the past. Computers (and other technical artefacts) are not fine art, and don't necessarily need to be covered by the same rules. IMHO the London Science Muaseum's policy is broken. I discovered this when I offered them some flip-chip boards to replace missing ones in one of their machines. They refused because mine, although the correct types, were a couple of years later than the machine. I would have expected them to have marked them as replacements, to keep a log book, and so on. But surely a complete machine is more use than an incomplete one. And to top it all, it was as machine that had been used and taken out of service, and then donated to the museum. I would be _very_ suprised if none of the flip-chip boards had been replaced during its working life. To comment on some other points that have been raised in this discussion. Yes, a log book can get lost or separated from the machine. This is not a reason for not keeping one (IMHO a log book should be kept for any rare machine that you're working on), it's surely a good reason to keep multiple copies of the log. Yes, it's _possible_ somebody will want to research the paint used on a classic computer some time in the distant future. I think it's more likely, though, they'll be more interested in the electronic design of the machine, in the programs it ran, in the uses it was put to (e.g. 'This machine was the first (popular home comuter)|(machine to bring word processing to the masses)|(etc)'), and so on. So IMHO machines should be kept running as far as possible. With reference to the comment that a reproduction front panel constructed differently to the origianl might confuse future researchers, why do the vintage radio crowd insist on re-stuffing electrolytic capacitor cans? That IMHO is very likely to cause confusion as to the original construction. I won't do this, I simply mount a new, suitable, capacitor in place of the old one. And I've been flamed for doing so. Another thought. I read a monthly magazine called 'Clocks' which not suprisingly is about antique clocks, both the history and the repair/restoration. Many of the clocks described and repaird there are rarer than most of the computers we deal with here. But almost always they are repaired, it it considered normal to cut a new wheel, bush the pivot holes in the plates, and so on. And it appears no record is kept of this work. A related thing could be the Salisbury clock (the oldest mechanical clock still running IIRC). It was found stuck in the catherdal tower about 80 years ago, and fortunately somebody recognised what it was. It had been converted from the origianl foliot balance to a pendulum at some point in its life. Anyway, it was cleaned up, and converted back to the orignal design (as far as can be determined). The new parts are painted a slightly different colour, so they can be identified, and of course records have been made of what was done. But it most certainly has not been left in the ' as found' condition. And that is a much rarer and much more significant artefact than anything we deal with on this list. -tony

William Donzelli wrote: Yep - hence the reason for keeping samples of the original paint, though. I can see that someone in the future might be interested in the original paint used (although doesn't that in itself open a whole can of worms in terms of UV exposure and the like?). I just wouldn't like the future possibility of a handful of people being interested in the paintwork compromising the preservation of an item in the medium term (and the same goes for other components) Well, I suppose it's not *that* over the top - providing that it's a *certainty* that the wax is non-reactive over time :-) Mind you, experience of old cars is that moisture often gets beneath the paintwork and attacks the metal, causing rust, which then only starts showing through to the surface and becoming visible once it's taken a good hold beneath. I doubt that computer cabinets are any different - so that wax coating better be darn good if it's going to stop further deterioration beneath the new coat of paint... In the case of plastic, isn't it UV exposure that causes the yellowing? So yep, that certainly makes sense as the paint coat should both improve the look of the item and stop the plastic itself from breaking down further. Of course, I'm not sure how someone would remove the paint at some future date without whatever method used (chemical or blasting) also damaging the plastic itself... cheers Jules