Sorry, yes, I realise I replied too hastily on that one --- there's enough to fight against without exhausting oneself, and others, fighting windmills! However, I will say that if you have an original MS rather than a photograph, it is easier to see what is just an incidental mark on the paper rather than a deliberate stroke of the pen, and, where there are superimposed corrections, it's easier to see which is the original letter and which the correction. Again, I have an original signature in parts of which only the impression of the pen can be seen since the ink has run out. This three-dimensional information is completely missing in a photograph, making the signature indecipherable to somebody who only has the photo. Sara ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christine Randall" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 3:45 PM Subject: Re: [SUT] ORIGINALS FOR THE BIN! > Digital copies are exact copy of the original so no room for > mistakes - they would be identical to the original, just in a > different format. > > If they were to keep the originals, they would probably stash > them away somewhere and restrict access - in the name > of preservation BECAUSE they have digital copies - > so the end result would be the same as if they destroyed > them. Perhaps that's how "they" think!!?? > > ChristineR > Vic Australia > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Sara Thomas <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 8:41 AM > Subject: Re: [SUT] ORIGINALS FOR THE BIN! > > > > Knowing the sort of mistakes that can creep into copies, I think this > > is crazy. Surely they can find somewhere to keep them? > > Sara > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christine Stokes" <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 8:10 PM > > Subject: [SUT] ORIGINALS FOR THE BIN! > > > > > > > The ABERDEEN & North East SCOTLAND FAMILY HISTORY JOURNAL Nov 2002, > > the > > > Chairmans report includes the following: > > > > > > "The GENERAL REGISTER OFFICE in EDINBURGH has an ongoing project to > > digitise > > > the SCOTTISH STATUTORY CERTIFICATES of BIRTH, MARRIAGE and DEATH. > > We are > > > hearing, from contacts at the registrars offices, that after the > > > digitisation has been completed the ORIGINAL CERTIFICATES held in > > the > > > REGIONS will be DESTROYED. Yes, I said DESTROYED. The copies of the > > > original certificates held in EDINBURGH will be RETAINED." > > > > > > Thought this might be of general interest to you all. Seems like > > maybe the > > > fight to keep the original certificates in Sutherland was a waste of > > time! > > > > > > Christine > > > Northamptonshire, England > > > www.highlandhearts.com > > > www.sutherlandheritage.com > > > > > > > > > --- > > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > > Version: 6.0.408 / Virus Database: 230 - Release Date: 24/10/2002 > > > > > > > > > ==== SCT-SUTHERLAND Mailing List ==== > > > To check out previous messages > > > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/SCT-SUTHERLAND-L/ > > > > > > ============================== > > > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy > > records, go to: > > > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > > > > > > > > > > > > ==== SCT-SUTHERLAND Mailing List ==== > > To check out previous messages > > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/SCT-SUTHERLAND-L/ > > > > ============================== > > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, > go to: > > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > > > > > ==== SCT-SUTHERLAND Mailing List ==== > Our Member's Interest's site > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~suthlist/index.htm > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >