1
|
- DLF Fall Forum
- October 26, 2004
- Rebecca Guenther
- LC/NDMSO
- rgue@loc.gov
|
2
|
- Information that supports and documents the digital preservation
process:
- Establish provenance: track chain of custody and alterations over time
- Details authenticity
- Documents technical processes object has undergone
- Describes technical details of object
- Describes the environment from which it originated
- Specify rights management information
|
3
|
- Provide information to maintain resources over the long term:
- viability: object’s bitstream is intact
- renderability: object can be translated to a form that can be viewed or
used
- understandability: rendered content can be interpreted and understood
|
4
|
- March 2000: OCLC and RLG jointly sponsor international working group on
preservation metadata
- Identify key issues/challenges
- Seek consensus on recommendations and best practice
- White paper (January 2001)
- Defined preservation metadata; role in preservation process
- Reviewed/synthesized existing preservation metadata schemes
- Preservation metadata framework (June 2002)
- Comprehensive description of types of information constituting
preservation metadata
- Based on OAIS information model
- Set of “prototype” preservation metadata elements
|
5
|
- Framework …
- Consolidated expertise
- Provided foundation for developing formal preservation metadata
specifications
- Common departure point for different schema implementations
- But ... further scope for collaboration in preservation metadata
- Needed best practices/recommendations for implementing preservation
metadata in real world digital archiving systems
|
6
|
- How minimal is a core preservation metadata element set?
- How much metadata can be generated automatically?
- Is it useful to apply metadata elements by object type or object
behavior?
- Levels of granularity not addressed
- Need to provide less abstract view of preservation metadata for
implementation
|
7
|
- June 2003: OCLC and RLG sponsored new working group: PREMIS
- Preservation Metadata: Implementation Strategies
- Objectives
- Define “core” set of preservation metadata elements, with supporting
data dictionary, applicable to broad range of digital preservation
activities
- Identify and evaluate alternative strategies for encoding, storing,
managing, and exchanging preservation metadata
|
8
|
- Priscilla Caplan, FCLA (Chair)
- Rebecca Guenther, LC (Chair)
- Michael Alexander, British Library
- George Barnum, GPO
- Charles Blair, U. of Chicago
- Olaf Brandt, U. of Gottingen
- Adam Farquhar, British Library
- David Gewirtz, Yale
- Kevin Glavash, MIT/Dspace
- Cathy Hartman, U. of N. Texas
- Helen Hodgart, British Library
- Nancy Hoebelheinrich, Stanford
- Roger Howard/Sally Hubbard, Getty Museum
- Pam Kircher, OCLC
- John Kunze, Calif. Digital Library
- Brian Lavoie, OCLC liaison
- Robin Dale, RLG liaison
- Vicky McCarger, LA Times
- Jerry McDonough, NYU/METS
- Evan Owens, JSTOR
- Erin Rhodes, NARA
- Madi Solomon, Walt Disney Co.
- Angela Spinazze, ATSPIN
- Stefan Strathmann, U. of Gottingen
- Gunter Waibel, RLG
- Lisa Weber, NARA
- Robin Wendler, Harvard
- Hilde van Wijngaarden, KB
- Andrew Wilson, NAA
|
9
|
- Howard Besser, UCLA
- Liz Bishoff, OCLC (via Colorado Digitization Program)
- Gerard Clifton, National Library of Australia
- Gail Hodge, CENDI
- Steve Knight, National Library of New Zealand
- Maggie Jones, Digital Preservation Coalition
- Nancy McGovern, Cornell
- Cliff Morgan, Wiley UK
- Richard Rinehart, U. of California, Berkeley
|
10
|
- Core elements
- Establish core metadata elements and data dictionary
- Developed a data model
- Has had 2 face-to-face meetings
- Weekly conference calls
- Implementation
- Examine alternative strategies for encoding, storage and management of
preservation metadata
- Conducted a survey of practices
- Monthly conference call
- Expect to complete activities by end of 2004
|
11
|
- Development of data model
- Objects
- Events
- Agents
- Intellectual entities
- Rights
- Data dictionary structured according to entities
|
12
|
- Conducting element-by-element review of prototype elements from metadata
framework
- Is the element “core”?
- How is it being used at WG members’ institutions?
- How should it be implemented/populated?
- Elements not covered by the framework?
|
13
|
- Identifiers
- Location
- Descriptive metadata out of scope
- Technical metadata not specific to particular file format
- Levels of objects: representation, file, filestream, bitstream
|
14
|
- Object characteristics
- Fixity
- Size
- Format (including link to format registry)
- Inhibitors
- Significant properties
- Creating application information
- Environment (software, hardware)
- Externally defined technical metadata (e.g. Z39.87/MIX)
|
15
|
- Digital provenance/process information
- Actions that involve one or more objects
- May be related to one or more agents
- Semantic units
- Event identifier
- Event type
- Event outcome
- Event detail
- Event date/time
|
16
|
- Agent descriptions out of scope
- Attributes of agents associated with preservation events and rights
management
- May carry-out, authorize, or compel one or more events
- may create or act upon one or more objects
- may hold or grant one or more rights
- Semantic units
- Agent identifier
- Agent name
|
17
|
- Rights
- Only in context of right to preserve
- Collecting rights use cases
- Relationships
- Data model expresses relationships between entities
- Relationships between objects
- Derivative, dependency, structural
|
18
|
|
19
|
|
20
|
- Conducted survey of preservation repositories to explore the state of
the art
- Questions about policies, governance, funding, system architecture,
preservation strategies, metadata implementation
- 70 surveys sent
- Responses from 28 libraries, 7 archives, 14 other in 13 different
countries
- 10 national libraries, 6 national archives
- Survey published Oct. 2004
|
21
|
- Little experience with digital preservation
- Most didn’t have active preservation strategy
- Many not yet in production
- Cannot assess adequacy of metadata
- Lack of common vocabulary and conceptual framework
- Informed by OAIS reference model
- Difference of opinion as to meaning of OAIS compliance
|
22
|
- Metadata
- Many recording rights, provenance, technical, administrative,
descriptive and structural
- Consistent roles in preservation scope and policies (academic libraries,
archives, national libraries)
- Substantial use of METS, Z39.87/MIX, OCLC sets
- Most repositories serve goals of both preservation and access
|
23
|
- Store metadata redundantly in XML or relational database and with
content data objects
- Use METS for structural metadata and as container for descriptive and
administrative; MIX for images
- Use OAIS as framework and starting point
- Maintain multiple versions (originals, some normalized or migrated) in
repository with complete metadata for all versions
- Choose multiple strategies for digital preservation
|
24
|
- Finalize core preservation metadata elements set
- Complete data dictionary
- XML schemas to support exchange of core elements for digital
provenance/process and technical metadata
- Final PREMIS report by end of 2004
- Community outreach: opportunities for public comment
- Follow-on activities?
|
25
|
- PREMIS Web site:
- http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/pmwg/
- “Implementing Metadata in Digital Preservation Systems: The PREMIS
Activity” D-Lib (April ‘04)
- http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april04/lavoie/04lavoie.html
- Rebecca Guenther: rgue@loc.gov
- Priscilla Caplan: pcaplan@ufl.edu
|