Natural history collections may still be interested in such. They merge the concept of needing small footprint size labels (e.g. 4 point Times) that go under t

Natural history collections may still be interested in such. They merge the concept of needing small footprint size labels (e.g. 4 point Times) that go under the physical specimen. The label must not take a lot of space, so for 2mm long insects you have maybe 4-5 lines of ~30 characters. We've long used QR or 128 codes to encode a small barcode of the catalog number for that specimen. The hotness now is the "digital twin" or "digital exentended specimen" for these physical specimens. Perhaps encoding cheaply some key attributes on another label would let the physical part of the twin track the evolution of the digital twin. The key here is that these collection's goal is protection of the specimen over time, we've been doing it since Linneaus (over 250 years), so archival considerations (acid free paper and ink), and persistence of data beyond the initial layer are important.