GUIDELINES FOR THE CURATION OF GEOLOGICAL MATERIALS

(2) take all necessary steps for their safe preservation;
(3) make them accessible for study;
(4) publish lists of name-bearing types in its possession or custody; and
(5)'so far as possible, communicate information concerning namebearing
types when requested by zoologists."
4.4.3. Description
4.4.3.1. Dimensions
A record of the size of any museum object serves two functions; one to enable the
construction of a mental image of the specimen from a written record, and the
other to assist the accurate recognition of the specimen, should it lose its identity
number or specimen label.
In this regard, however, we must turn again to a clarification of the term
'specimen'. For the present purposes, a specimen is the whole object, for example
the fossil fish and its matrix. The length of the fish, whilst undoubtedly of
importance palaeontologically (and of value in the recognition of the specimen) is
of less immediate significance for the curator engaged in specimen documentation.
Moreover, the curator, perhaps unschooled in the finer points of palaeontological
interpretation need not make specialist measurements, e.g. for a
gastropod, apical angle, whorl height, etc. However, when measurements of this
type are taken, such as for a research project, they can be kept in the History
Files and referred to in the catalogue as appropriate.
In the example of a fish in matrix, the length of the fish itself may be recorded
in the general description, or as a second entry under 'Dimension7 according to
the data standards in operation.
By avoiding interpretative or specialist measurements, the curator can use a
simple, commonsense method for recording dimensions.
The weight of a specimen is rarely recorded though this practice might be of
value in object recognition. It is recommended as an appropriate parameter for
precious metals and cut gems.
4.4.3.2. Conditionl completeness
These two terms are to a greater or lesser degree subjective and there are
arguments against their inclusion as information headings, as opposed to
inclusion, when appropriate, in a generalised description. Certainly, internal
conventions should govern the use of formal, qualitative terms such as good,
excellent, poor, etc., etc. Some curators prefer to record formal information
about condition only when a specimen is about to be conserved, and then to
record it in prose (rather than in a classified form using 'keyword and detail' - see
MDA 1980 p. 2-10).
Similarly, the completeness of a specimen, expressed as keyword and detail,
can be considered as information of value as an aid to object recognition though
more specific information would perform the same function better in prose.
In the case of missing specimens, record under this heading the term
'MISSING' together with a date and name. The date is that when the curator
established that the specimen was indeed missing. Details such as 'probably
destroyed by enemy action 1940', can be added here or under 'Notes'. (See also
B6.2.1.1.)