HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
G ALCOCK <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:16:13 -0800
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (545 bytes) , text/html (571 bytes)

The original post on this thread was from England (as I recall), where I presume there are national curation standards, including bag thickness, and where the U.S. federal standards would be irrelevant. What is the national standard in the UK?

(I suggested the U.S.'s National Park Service standards because they are one of many sets of standards, but I'm sure Parks Canada and other similar agencies around the world have weighed in on the bag-thickness thing.)

Still, 2-mil bags seem a little thin for such potentially curatorially nasty contents.


ATOM RSS1 RSS2