CURATEcamp SAA 2012 Notes

Collaborative Doc for Drafting Notes

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qAM6cvzvrODd2EN-vWm_1IG5oxApqxS3kv6DIcttM_E/edit

Session 1: Acquisition & Appraisal

Policy

Review your policies to make sure “digital” is included. (Collection development, accessioning, donor agreements, etc.)

Resources:

Digital Preservation Online Tutorial: http://www.dpworkshop.org
Electronic Records Guidelines: http://www.records.ncdcr.gov/erecords/
Policy documents: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/curation/preservation/policies
An Inter-Institutional Model for Stewardship (AIMS) whitepaper: http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/aims/whitepaper
Personal Archives Accessible in Digital Media (paradigm) workbook: http://www.paradigm.ac.uk/workbook/
Ethnographic Collections in the Archive of Folk Culture: A Contributor’s Guide: http://www.loc.gov/folklife/cg.html

Life cycle management

The role of the archivist and the issue of preservation needs to be addressed sooner in the records creation process.

Proactive collecting policy, eliminates backlog.

"Don't be the person that your successor curses, five, ten years down the road."

Collaboration

Partnering and staying a part of the discussion (data governance, IT policy/records management) as a way of knowledge management in your institutions.

American Folklife Center posted policies on ethnographic collections; engaging donors to describe so cultural context isn’t lost.

Think about value-added services that you can provide. (file plans, develop tools, guidance on embedding metadata, training) - things that will make their lives easier; consider easiest steps with most rewards

Develop file plans. Link file types to retention schedules and working workflow out of that. JISC and UK universities have roll-up file plans. Management tool that downloads into the email.

Encourage embedded metadata. Offer training through HR.

Resources:

JISC Higher Education Business Classification Scheme: http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/partnerships/records-retention-he/
University of Melbourne Enterprise Classification Scheme: http://www.unimelb.edu.au/records/ECS/
Robert Gordon University Aberdeen's Business Classification Scheme: http://www4.rgu.ac.uk/rm/general/page.cfm?pge=76088
Griffith University: http://www.griffith.edu.au/ua/aa/secretariat/carms/bcs/
University of Edinburgh: http://www.recordsmanagement.ed.ac.uk/InfoStaff/RMstaff/RMprojects/PP/FileNameRules/FileNameRules.htm

Looking for resources on up-front and ongoing costs of preservation, i.e. “How much does it cost to process a terabyte?”

Resources:

Digital Preservation Online Tutorial: http://www.dpworkshop.org/dpm-eng/eng_index.html
LIFE Project (University College, London and the BL - http://www.life.ac.uk/

ACTION items:

Review your policies to make sure “digital” is included. (Collection development, accessioning procedures, donor agreements, etc.)
Share your policies on your websites, please.
Do more cost analysis & share your findings.

Session 2: Arrangement and Description

Challenges/Issues

Digital Collections

People don’t really know how to organize electronic files.
No respect des fonds the same way for electronic files.
What is the intent of archival arrangement and description?
At the aggregate level, knowing where a file falls in the collection.
Metadata
Clarifying (Record creating environment)
Digital files/ media messes with the concept of original order
Multiple versions of the same photo. Which is the presentation version?
Files and software interaction
As archivists, do we continue to focus on creating the context, or do we focus on preserving to create access to allow context to be discovered?
Producer Archive Method Interface Standard
DACS doesn’t allow to describe record keeping practices well
Messiness of files: how much organization can you get out of the filenaming ?
What tools do we need in order to apply DACS-like arrangement to electronic files? Do we WANT to apply DACS-like arrangement to electronic files?

Hybrid Collections

Adding description re: processing legacy files/media to existing
Context (representing)

Moving Towards Solutions

Reproducible Methods (Tools and Workflows)
Moving beyond file level approach
MPLP approach to arranging and describing electronic files
One approach is to create a directory printing that users can view in Excel, and thereby can manipulate and sort
- Stopgap measure (some access is better than none) but all this really provides access to is file names and extensions, which may not be all that helpful
Metadata extraction at accessioning (disk image level)
Let the computer do more of the processing.
MPLP for digitization-- Repurposing the finding aid in a digital environment so you don’t have to do item level description.
Scalability (file storage, workflow)
Object management (PIDS, Compound/single)
Setting up at start of project
Look at Vis. Resources Community
Scanning priorities
Delivery methods

Resources:

Tom Hyry and Michelle Light, “Colophons and Annotations: New Directions for the Finding Aid.” American Archivist 65(2), 2002. http://archivists.metapress.com/content/l3h27j5x8716586q/
Producer-Archive Interface Methodology Abstract Standard. Recommendation for Space Data System Practices. Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems Magenta Book, 2004. http://public.ccsds.org/publications/archive/651x0m1.pdf
Presentation from SAA 2011. Archivists’ Toolkit plugin. http://www2.archivists.org/groups/archivists-toolkitarchon-roundtable/saa-2011-annual-meeting-presentation-digital-object-workf
Metadata Deluxe has the tools, instruction, examples. Although built for photograph or scanning physical material it also extends to mass digitization. http://metadatadeluxe.pbworks.com/w/page/20792238/FrontPage

ACTION items:

Comment on DACS revision.
- Revision available here: http://www2.archivists.org/groups/technical-subcommittee-on-describing-archives-a-content-standard-dacs/describing-archives-a-c
- Send comments to Gordon Daines: gordon_daines@byu.edu.

Session 3: Tools & Workflows

(management tools, not access tools)

Discussion of what tools are being used to acquire and manage born-digital content:

Tools for digital preservation

Archivematica
Droid
Curators Workbench
FTK (Imager)
Bagger
Fiwalk
Confluence
Karen’s dir printer
MD5 Deep
Tika
Elastic Search
Duke Data Accessioner
Disk Imager
Sleuth Kit
Mac Drive
Cider press
FITS
Bulk Extractor
FC-5025 Software
Archivists Toolkit
Kryoflux
JHOVE
Media Info
WCT & Heretix
Google Refine
Guymager
Collective Access
Bitcurator
DPSP (NZ) Digital Preservation Software Platform(?)
Taper Tool
Cinch
Mount Holyoke Tool
EELMP
WARCreate

DAMS, Access Systems & Repositories

Access:
- ContentDM (Heather G. but we’re moving away from it)
- Collective Access. (Kari)
- Digitool (Meditor = metadata tool) (going away)
- XTF (Kari)
- Fedora
- ICA Atom (Cindy)
- digital collection builder. QUBIT (testing Kari)
- Omeka (Heather G.) (Alison H.) (Cynthia G)
- Blacklight (Heather G.)
- Islandora
- Drupal (Heather G.)
- Dsapce
- Luna Insight (Meg- but not for long)
- Open WMS (Heather G.)
- Resource Space (Cynthia G)
- Eprints
- Kora
- Homegrown
- Piction (Alison H. - we just adopted it, i don’t have experience with it yet)

Preservation/ Management:
- Archivematica (Cindy)
- ContentDM
- Fedora
- Roda
- Safety Deposit Box
- DAITSS
- Dspace (Matthew http://ucispace.lib.uci.edu)
- Rosetta
- Open WMS (Heather G.)
- Resources Space
- Eprints
- Filesystem (Alison H. - the “Digital Shelf”)
- Homegrown (UCSD http://libraries.ucsd.edu/about/digital-library/index.html)
- Chronopolis
- Kora (Cynthia G)
- iRODS (Cynthia G)

Is anyone storing their data in the cloud?

Restrictions about storing data within certain borders (Educause & NACIO are good resources for policies relating to cloud storage)
Educause: Cloud Computing Explained:http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/cloud-computing-explained
Educause: Cloud Computing Policy: http://www.educause.edu/library/cloud-computing-policy

Pre-Ingest (prep) - Ingest/Acquisitions - Processing 35-minute discussion on how to move through these processes

A lot of this work is represented in AIMS. Where do we go from there? http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/aims/whitepaper/

What kind of functional requirements will determine what tools we need?

5 bits of information needed to determine which tools will help us get there:

Risk assessment > Media fragility/ data triage
With born digital --access vs. preservation > Records need to be maintained as records. Made accessible
Metadata of the objects, vs. metadata about
Start at creation
Traditional archivists vs. digital conservators > Houses of expertise

Resources:

Blog post on SPRUCE mash-up: http://futurearchives.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/spruce-mashup-16th-18th-april-2012.html
Preservation/Imaging Tools Blogs (Review, Survey, question/comment):
- Open Planets Foundations: http://www.openplanetsfoundation.org/
- File Formats Blog: http://fileformats.wordpress.com/
- The Signal (LOC Digital Preservation Blog): http://blogs.loc.gov/digitalpreservation/

Session 4: Access

Hybrid collections, consider:

Level/Type of description (Live links in finding aids series, folder, or item level depending on where description ended)
Use Curators Workbench to create a MODS record to embed in the EAD -- bringing two descriptions together.
Metadata management- synching of descriptions in various places --with preservation repository.
- Database of record issue
- Some are making policies to edit in one place, then push out.
Rights management

Are we talking to users about how they want to access digital content?

User engagement
Issue temporary usernames and passwords while researchers are in reading room so they have access to materials only in the reading room

Is anyone creating access to materials that have varying levels of restrictions?

Yes, metadata triggers access, e.g. UCSD
Mukurtu - dissemination program developed specifically to address cultural sensitivity.
Norc data enclave
Virtual reading room - you need a DSpace user login approved to see collection--allows for varying access at different levels of granularity.

Northwest digital archives- bringing in contextual information for multiple digital asset management systems. User contributed metadata--(commenting, tagging)

Review boards to review user contributed data--sustainable?
What do you do with this data? If you have only folder level metadata on an item, and
Users contribute data, how can you leverage this data into other fields?
- Linked data - different communities
- Prioritize the resources of your institution
- User community is not always the same as our creator community
- Designated communities of users vs. a broad audience of users.

Linked Data ... How will this solve issues of round-tripping data and description?

Resources:

Mukurtu:http://www.mukurtu.org/
Norc data enclave: http://www.dataenclave.org/index.php/home/welcome
VIVO: http://vivoweb.org/
DIPIR (Dissemination information Packages for information reuse): http://www.dipir.org/
SAHARA: http://www.saharaonline.org/
Historypin: http://www.historypin.com/map/#!/geo:32.725,-117.172/zoom:7/

Wrap Up

Future Camps:

Ask a few people to come with a lightning talk to fill any dead space.
Brainstorm, then breakout groups, then report back to the bigger group
Diversify community - Multiple disciplines are dealing with a lot of the same issues as us. We need to create a better dialog with these other communities.
Sit in a circle
Multiple whiteboards has been useful
Consider organizing regional hackfests (NEA, NWA, MAC, MARAC)
Bring best practices
Post policies, workflows, field surveys
Utilize liaisons (internal and external groups, sections, roundtables)

ACTION items: