I think that your response to this issue is useful, pointing out the continuum between libraries and museums. I would, however, question your distinction that a museum is not a museum unless it owns original objects. In the United States, this has been a bone of contention, choking a dialogue instigated by the American Association of Museums. (BLOCK THAT METAPHOR!) They were drafting a code of ethics for museums professionals and boards, and got totally hung up, as I recall, on this particular issue. There was a recent issue of curator magazine (published by the American Museum of Natural History) where Bob MacDonald, from the Museum of the City of New York, and a former president of AAM, eloquently spoke for the need for the distinction you offer. Just as eloquently, and I think ultimately more convincingly, Alan Friedman of the New York Hall of Science, disputed the importance of the distinction between original object-owning and more interpretation-based museums. Alan was of course, arguing that science centers were museums for all intents and purposes (mostly funding, I speculate), while Bob argued for the importance of owning original objects is defining museums. Lots of heat, little light. Eric Siegel [log in to unmask]