Per, et al:
Per, I am still digesting your thoughtful comments but I wish to add something to my observations which, upon reflection, I left dangling.  You asked what is gained by categorizing the ICs.  I failed to add a conclusion which addresses this, so here it its.  To me, not all ICs are created equal.  I consider some to be "core" ICs of irreducible interest to all museums (conservation, management, etc.) and others to be far too specialized for all but a few curators (glass, money, etc.).  However, each new committee dilutes the pool of available funding as though they were all equally relevant to all museums.  Couldn't these rarefied committees be re-designated as some form of unfunded specialized interest committee?  Of course this suggestion will do nothing to advance my popularity in this profession, but the present arrangement just doesn't seem to make sense.  
Milton


 ttp://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
archives at:  http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html