Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 17 Nov 1998 17:40:18 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
Organization: |
The Lost Towns of Anne Arundel Project |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Ned, you're a card. You are also right about how easily CRM reports can
be improved. A little attention to writing and design, avoidance of
boilerplated material that has nothing to do with the project, and
elimination of the reams of unnecessary appendices that often accompany
reports will improve quality and reduce costs. Eliminating unnecessary
photographs that seem to be included to prove that a hole was indeed dug
also will contribute to these goals.
Most of us who write CRM reports probably would be happy to make these,
and other, reforms. The place to broach these issues, however, is at the
conference of historic preservation officers. They write the standards
and guidelines with we must comply.
Jim Gibb
The Lost Towns of Anne Arundel Project
Annapolis, MD USA
|
|
|