DOC PREVIEW
ODU CS 791 - Study Guide

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 5 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Preserving Digital Information: Final Report and RecommendationsINFORMATION OBJECTS IN THE DIGITAL LANDSCAPE p.11ARCHIVAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES p.21StorageAccessSystems EngineeringMIGRATION STRATEGIESChange FormatIncorporate StandardsBuild Migration PathsUsing Processing CentersManaging Costs and FinancesFinancingSUMMARYTerry Harrison – notes onSeminal reading:_________________________________________________________________Preserving Digital Information: Final Report and RecommendationsTask Force on Archiving of Digital Information – Research Library Grouphttp://www.rlg.org/ArchTF/_________________________________________________________________This document takes a broad look at the goals and requirements of preservation of digital objects from a nationwide (and possibly even larger) perspective. A distributed archive solution is recommended, for reasons of both cost and redundancy. A digital archive certification mechanism will be needed to ensure the capabilities of participating archives. – THBackground:At the end of 1994 the Commission on Preservation and Access (CPA) and RLG created a Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information charged with investigating and recommending means to ensure "continued access indefinitely into the future of records stored in digital electronic form." In May 1996, the 21-member task force, co-chaired by Donald Waters and John Garrett, completed their final report. Both RLG and CPA have made this widely available. (In 1997, CPA merged with the Council on Library Resources to become CLIR—the Council on Library and Information Resources.)This is perhaps the first commissioned study on digital archiving.64 pagesStatus: currently reading_________________________________________________________________Thoughts: - Status of emulation software / hardwareMigration – to move from one technology to anotherRefresh – to periodically recopy (e.g. to a drive w. less hours on it)Digital archives are different than digital librariesArchives need a “certification” process (to assure competency)Archives need to be able to exercise an aggressive rescue function for digital informationFeatures of digital landscapeStakeholdersHardware obsolescence – no new parts for old machines- 1960 Census – only 2 UNIVAC type II-A machines left in world, when Census Bureau decided to attempt to refresh data- 1964 – the 1st email was not saved. Not sure which research group sent first message: MIT, Carnegie Institute of Tech, or Cambridge University- 1960s LUNR Project – Land Use and Natural Resources Inventory Project; computerized map of NY depicting patterns of land usage and identifying natural resources. In 1980’s data could not be retrieved off of computer tapes, leaving only printouts and transparency overlays.- 1985 - Committee on the Records of Government “The United States is in danger of losing its memory”“If we are effectively to preserve for future generations the portion of this rapidly expanding corpus of information in digital form that represents our cultural record, we need to understand the costs of doing so and we need to commit ourselves technically, legally, economically and organizationally to the full dimensions of the task. Failure to look for trusted means and methods of digital preservation will certainly exact a stiff, long-term cultural penalty.” PAGE 4Refreshing is good, but not a compete solution- 2-5 year technical obsolescence cycle (shorter than media shelf life)- Hardware and software dependent records may not be forward compatible- Expensive for hardware and software to maintain backward compatibility- Proprietary systems often don’t work w. competing products- Emulators could helpMigration- Defined as “periodic transfer of digital materials from one hardware/software configuration to another, or from one generation of computer technology to another”- Migration may not yield perfect copies onto newer technologies- E.g. - .psd to .jpeg is a lossy transition- Forward migration of information to a new standard or application program is “time consuming, costly, and more complex than simply refreshing”Legal and Organizational Issues- Always complex- “Bits know no borders”Sudo summary- “(The) greatest fear about the life of information in the digital future: namely that owners or custodians who can no longer bear the expense and difficulty (of moving digital information forward in the digital future) will deliberately or inadvertently, through a simple failure to act, destroy the objects without regard for future use.The Need for a Deep Infrastructure- w. “Various systematic supports”- Many diff aspects of the digital environment will have to be addressed in diff ways - th- No one stop solution – thConceptual Framework- A national system of digital archives envisioned- Long-term storage and access goals (which are issues not always dealt w. by dig. libraries)- Repository criteria: o Development of an archive certification standard suggestedo “Aggressive fail-safe mechanism” to rescue information that is endangered at its current location.Plan of Work- Archival responsibility starts at creation (w. creator)- “We can afford to continue and increase economic and social investments in digital information objects and in the responsibilities for them on the information superhighway if , and only if, wealso create the archival means for the knowledge the objects and repositories contain to endure andredound to the benefit of future generations”INFORMATION OBJECTS IN THE DIGITAL LANDSCAPE p.11Integrity of digital information: determined by content, fixity, reference, provenance, and context gives the digital information object its value.Content: - Definition as: preserving unique bit configuration, checksums to check, all well but limiting, esp. where limited by hardware/software (think word-processing document). - Bits versus use. To save as an image as a JPEG is lossy, but aids in storage and use.- Save bits? Save the idea conveyed? Save it so that it can be used? Answers will be different for different informationFixity:- An object’s integrity is lost if it is constantly changing (ie document revisions can obscure the original document).- Watermarking of digital objects (i.e. as canonical version)- Snapshots in time (i.e. for databases) – sounds familiar to Internet Archives – Wayback MachineReference:- “Must be able to locate it definitively and reliably over time…”-


View Full Document

ODU CS 791 - Study Guide

Documents in this Course
Load more
Download Study Guide
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Study Guide and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Study Guide 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?