Difference between revisions of "At Risk Records in 3rd Party Systems"
(Created page with "Jeanne: How do we know about and capture records created outside the organization - in the cloud, on 3rd party sites? Brandon: We focus on preserving congressional records. How...") |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Large organizations have lots of rules about what you can and cannot do on the official channels, but people go off and do their own thing. Great ideas that people want to act on. | Large organizations have lots of rules about what you can and cannot do on the official channels, but people go off and do their own thing. Great ideas that people want to act on. | ||
| + | |||
| + | What are the significant properties? What needs to be preserved - just the content you can extract? Or do you need the full experience? Sometimes the answer is yes - especially if the new format is a continuation of an existing series of records. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Maybe we need standards/guidelines for new content publication. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Keeping both the original 1s and 0s so we can emulate later AND extract content for short term access to 'content'. | ||
| + | |||
| + | There are consequences to not having and following a 'file plan'. Part of people's jobs have to be to follow the rules. | ||
| + | |||
| + | If you know what is going to be created, you can 'shame' people into giving you what they haven't yet. NY Philharmonic keeps 'every scrap of paper'. This removes the need for judgement calls for individuals - everything goes to the archives. | ||
Revision as of 16:23, 26 July 2012
Jeanne: How do we know about and capture records created outside the organization - in the cloud, on 3rd party sites?
Brandon: We focus on preserving congressional records. How can we do dynamic data preservation? How do you get data from these 3rd party systems? Do we pull data from these systems.. or do we pull stand up virtualized instances of SharePoint.
At the NY Philharmonic.. first Annual Report/Factbook that they couldn't preserve since 1842. Dynamic content added, 3rd party tool. Closed off to standard approaches to archiving. The only way they could think of preserving this was a video of clicking through every part of the publication. This is not sustainable. 'We weren't consulted' beforehand.. but this is happening, so we have to live with it.
How do we preserve new compound/dynamic content when the organization is moving fast without consultation to the archives?
NSF has a data management plan approach - you must submit a plan before you get your grant. How about making it part of the 'rules' for moving forward.
Large institutions vs small institutions.
Large organizations have lots of rules about what you can and cannot do on the official channels, but people go off and do their own thing. Great ideas that people want to act on.
What are the significant properties? What needs to be preserved - just the content you can extract? Or do you need the full experience? Sometimes the answer is yes - especially if the new format is a continuation of an existing series of records.
Maybe we need standards/guidelines for new content publication.
Keeping both the original 1s and 0s so we can emulate later AND extract content for short term access to 'content'.
There are consequences to not having and following a 'file plan'. Part of people's jobs have to be to follow the rules.
If you know what is going to be created, you can 'shame' people into giving you what they haven't yet. NY Philharmonic keeps 'every scrap of paper'. This removes the need for judgement calls for individuals - everything goes to the archives.
