>
> Fascinating. I see that NARA is relying on a storage medium standard,
> which at present doesn't include optical disks. Here's a relevant
> paragraph...
>
snip snip
>.... Specifically, files must be written
> on half-inch magnetic tape, in EBCDIC or ASCII, without internal
> control characters, on 7 or 9 track open-reel magnetic tape,
> recorded at 800, 1600, or 6250 bytes per inch, or on 18 track
> 3480-class tape cartridge, recorded at 37,871 bytes per inch, and
> blocked no higher than 32,760 bytes.
Did you notice that segment in McNeil's PBS docu? It was startling. After
all the discussion of the mortality of tape and the obsolescence of
multi-track formats, they show optical disks being transferred to tape. No
comment was made in the narration, but it stood out as a major government
boo boo to me.
I keep wondering why there aren't read-only tape drives. This would allow
for the deposition of Hall-effect transistors in a tight array, something
that isn't possible with read/write heads that must also develop a magnetic
field. A technology could be developed which could be a universal tape
reader (not to be confused with a universal translator). It could read any
tape format at any speed by saving the image of magnetic domains on the
tape. Of special archival interest is that the Hall effect works even if
the tape isn't moving. This means that delicate tape stock could be passed
over the heads at very slow speeds to avoid flaking and limit the sticking
effect common to videotape. Since Hall effect transistors can be made on
substrates using integrated circuit techniques, the read/only heads could
be packed down at the micron level. Head stacks would then have 10,000
heads instead of 7 or 9. The redundancy serves a purpose, because it would
allow for reading helical scan and other cleverly packed magnetic media.
But I rant.
Tom Ditto