There are a large number of metadata standards and initiatives that have relevance to digital preservation, e.g. those designed to support the work of national and research libraries, archives and digitization initiatives. This paper introduces some of these, noting that the developers of some have acknowledged the importance of maintaining or re-using existing metadata. It is argued here that the implementation of metadata registries as part of a digital preservation system may assist repositories in enabling the management and re-use of this metadata and may also help interoperability, namely the exchange of metadata and information packages between repositories.
Publisher
2003 Dublin Core Conference: Supporting Communities of Discourse and Practice-Metadata Research & Applications
Publication Location
Seatle, WA
Critical Arguements
CA "This paper will introduce a range of preservation metadata initiatives including the influential Open Archival Information System (OAIS) reference model and a number of other initiatives originating from national and research libraries, digitization projects and the archives community. It will then comment on the need for interoperability between these specifications and propose that the implementation of metadata registries as part of a digital preservation system may help repositories manage diverse metadata and facilitate the exchange of metadata or information packages between repositories."
Conclusions
RQ "The plethora of metadata standards and formats that have been developed to support the management and preservation of digital objects leaves us with several questions about interoperability. For example, will repositories be able to cope with the wide range of standards and formats that exist? Will they be able to transfer metadata or information packages containing metadata to other repositories? Will they be able to make use of the 'recombinant potential' of existing metadata?" ... "A great deal of work needs to be done before this registry-based approach can be proved to be useful. While it would undoubtedly be useful to have registries of the main metadata standards developed to support preservation, it is less clear how mapping-based conversions between them would work in practice. Metadata specifications are based on a range of different models and conversions often lead to data loss. Also, much more consideration needs to be given to the practical issues of implementation." 
SOW
DC Michael Day is a research officer at UKOLN, which is based at the University of Bath. He belongs to UKOLN's research and development team, and works primarily on projects concerning metadata, interoperability and digital preservation. 
Type
Conference Proceedings
Title
Preserving the Fabric of Our Lives: A Survey of Web Preservation Initiatives
This paper argues that the growing importance of the World Wide Web means that Web sites are key candidates for digital preservation. After an [sic] brief outline of some of the main reasons why the preservation of Web sites can be problematic, a review of selected Web archiving initiatives shows that most current initiatives are based on combinations of three main approaches: automatic harvesting, selection and deposit. The paper ends with a discussion of issues relating to collection and access policies, software, costs and preservation.
Secondary Title
Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries, 7th European Conference, ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 2003 Proceedings
Publisher
Springer
Publication Location
Berlin
Critical Arguements
CA "UKOLN undertook a survey of existing Web archiving initiatives as part of a feasibility study carried out for the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) of the UK further and higher education funding councils and the Library of the Wellcome Trust. After a brief description of some of the main problems with collecting and preserving the Web, this paper outlines the key findings of this survey." (p. 462) Addresses technical, legal and organizational challenges to archiving the World Wide Web. Surveys major attempts that have been undertaken to archive the Web, highlights the advantages and disadvantages of each, and discusses problems that remain to be addressed.
Conclusions
RQ "It is hoped that this short review of existing Web archiving initiatives has demonstrated that collecting and preserving Web sites is an interesting area of research and development that has now begun to move into a more practical implementation phase. To date, there have been three main approaches to collection, characterised in this report as 'automatic harvesting,' 'selection' and 'deposit.' Which one of these has been implemented has normally depended upon the exact purpose of the archive and the resources available. Naturally, there are some overlaps between these approaches but the current consensus is that a combination of them will enable their relative strengths to be utilised. The longer-term preservation issues of Web archiving have been explored in less detail." (p. 470)
SOW
DC OAIS emerged out of an initiative spearheaded by NASA's Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. It has been shaped and promoted by the RLG and OCLC. Several international projects have played key roles in shaping the OAIS model and adapting it for use in libraries, archives and research repositories. OAIS-modeled repositories include the CEDARS Project, Harvard's Digital Repository, Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB), the Library of Congress' Archival Information Package for audiovisual materials, MIT's D-Space, OCLC's Digital Archive and TERM: the Texas Email Repository Model.
CA "Ironically, electronic records systems make it both possible to more fully capture provenance than paper recrods systems did and at the same time make it more likely that provenance will be lost and that archives, even if they are preserved, will therefore lack evidential value. This paper explores the relationship between provenance and evidence and its implications for management of paper or electronic information systems." (p. 177)
Conclusions
"Electronic information systems, therefore, present at least two challenges to archivists. The first is that the designers of these systems may have chosen to document less contextual information than may be of interest to archivists when they designed the system. The second is that the data recorded in any given information system will, someday, need to be transferred to another system. ... [A]rchivists will need to return to fundamental archival principles to determine just what they really wanted to save anyway. ... It may be that archivists will be satisfied with the degree of evidential historicity they were able to achieve in paper based record systems, in which case there are very few barriers to implementing successful electronic based archival environments. Or archivists may decide that the fuller capability of tracking the actual participation of electronic data objects in organizational activities needs to be documented by archivally satisfactory information systems, in which case they will need to define those levels of evidential historicity that must be attained, and specify the systems requirements for such environments. ... At a meeting on electronic records management research issues sponsored by the National Historical Publications and Records Commission in January 1991, participants identified the concept of technological and economic plateaux in electronic data capture and archiving as an important arena for research ... Hopefully this research will produce information to help archivists make decisions regarding the amount of contextual information they can afford to capture and the requirements of systems designed to document context along with managing data content. ... I will not be surprised as we refine our concepts of evidential historicity to discover that the concept of provenance takes on even greater granularity." (p. 192-193)
CA Discusses the ways traditional archival science can inform IT, and the ways IT can help the goals of archival science be achieved more easily and efficiently.
Conclusions
<RQ> "When archivists work with information technologies or electronic archiving specialists, they have a lot to offer. They are the ones who have the conceptual key to the analysis and design of the new archiving systems." (p. 174)
Type
Journal
Title
Strategies for managing electronic records: A new archival paradigm? An affirmation of our archival traditions?
CA It is still too early to tell which models (like Pitt or UBC) actually work until we have had time to evaluate them. Archivists need to learn new skills in order to be effective in the electronic environment, and cannot wait for an out-of-the-box solution. Most likely, any solution will require a combination of strategies. Most of all, one must remain flexible and open to new ways of doing things.
Phrases
<P1> Unlike paper documents where context and physical form are united in a medium that provides the record of the transaction, and where relationships among documents can be observed, electronic records are not physical but are logically constructed and often "virtual" entities. Therefore, it is argued, efforts to document business transactions based on the examination of "views" or of automated forms will fail to reveal the nature of the business transactions. Consequently, methods other than direct observation and review must be employed to properly document automated systems. (p.25) <P2> System metadata typically do not contain all the information archivists need to describe electronic records, in particular, all the necessary contextual data required to understand the context of the transaction are not present. Therefore it is suggested that archivists will need to know which metadata elements are required to fully describe these records and must be in a position to add these descriptive elements to the system, preferably at the design stage. (p.26)
Conclusions
RQ What is involved in effecting a major shift from creating descriptive data to capturing, managing and adding value to system metadata?
CA A major future challenge for recordkeeping professionals is to maximize knowledge via the deft use of metadata as a management tool.
Phrases
<P1> Recordkeeping in the 21st century will have to confront the fact that the very definition of what constitutes a record is dynamically changing. (p.6) <P2> With the advent of the Internet and the streaming of information from the unchartered, open environment which the Internet represents, it appears that public institutions will act to consider and incorporate as part of their best practices the use of new technologies, such as digital signatures and public key encryption, to ensure that authentic and trustworthy information is captured as part of their dealings with the public at large." (p.5)
Conclusions
RQ How will we deal with the records of the future -- electronic documents with a variety of embedded, interactive attachments?
Type
Journal
Title
Reality and Chimeras in the Preservation of Electronic Records
CA An emulation approach is not viable for e-records preservation because it preserves the "wrong thing": systems functionality rather than records. Consequently, an emulation solution would not preserve e-records as evidence "even if it could be made to work."
Phrases
<P1>Electronic records that are not moved out of obsolete hardware and software environments are very likely to die with them. <P2> Failure to examine in detail what makes an electronic record evidence over time has led Rothenberg, and many others, to assume they want to preserve system functionality. (p.2) <P3> The state of a database at any given moment is not a record. (p.2) <P4> If we want to preserve electronic records, what we really want are records of the actual inputs and outputs from the system to be maintained as evidence over time. This does not require the information system to function as it once did. All (!) it requires is that we can capture all transactions entering and leaving the system when they are created, ensuring that the original context of their creation and content is documented, and that the requirements of evidence are preserved over time. (p.2)
Conclusions
RQ Metadata encapsualtion strategies need to identify how metadata will be captured at the time of a record's creation, how it will be stored over time while supporting the use of the record by authorized users and more generally how the recordkeeping infrastructure will be constructed and maintained.
Type
Journal
Title
Capturing records' metadata: Unresolved questions and proposals for research
The author reviews a range of the research questions still unanswered by research on the capture of metadata required for recordness. These include how to maintain inviolable linkages between records and their metadata in a variety of architectures, what structure metadata content should take, the semantics of records metadata and that of other electronic sources, how new metadata can be acquired by records over time, maintaining the meaning of contextual metadata over time, the use of metadata in records management and the design of environments in which Business Acceptable Communications ÔÇô BAC ÔÇô (those with appropriate evidential metadata) can persist.
Critical Arguements
CA "My research consists of model building which enables the construction of theories and parallel implementations based on shared assumptions. Some of these models are now being tested in applications, so this report reflects both what we do not yet know from abstract constructs and questions being generated by field testing. " ... Bearman overviews research questions such as semantics, syntax, structure and persistence of metadata that still need to be addressed.
Phrases
<P1> Records are evidence when they are bound to appropriate metadata about their content, structure and context. <P2> The metadata required for evidence is described in the Reference Model for Business Acceptable Communications (BAC). <P3> Metadata which is required for evidence must continue to be associated with the record to which it relates over time and neither it nor the record content can be alterable. <P4> To date we have only identified three implementations which, logically, could allow metadata to retain this inviolable connection. Metadata can be: kept in a common envelope WITH a record (encapsulated), bound TO a record (by integrity controls within an environment), or LINKED with a record through a technical and/or social process (registration, key deposit, etc.). <P5> Metadata content was defined in order to satisfy a range of functional requirements of records, hence it ought to have a structure which enables it to serve these functions effectively and in concrete network implementations. <warrant> <P6> Clusters of metadata are must operate together. Clusters of metadata are required by different processes which take place at different times, for different software clients, and within a variety of processes. Distinct functions will need access to specified metadata substructures and must be able to act on these appropriately. Structures have been proposed in the Reference Model for Business Acceptable Communications. <P7> Metadata required for recordness must, logically, be standard; that required for administration of recordkeeping systems is extensible and locally variable. <P8> Records metadata must be semantically homogenous but it is probably desirable for it to be syntactically heterogeneous and for a range of protocols to operate against it. Records metadata management system requirements have both an internal and external aspect; internally they satisfy management requirements while externally they satisfy on-going recordness requirements. <P9> The metadata has to come either from a specific user/session or from rules defined to extract data either from a layer in the application or a layer between the application and the recording event. <P10> A representation of the business context must exist from which the record-creating event can obtain metadata values. <P11> Structural metadata must both define the dependent structures and identify them to a records management environment which is ÔÇ£patrollingÔÇØ for dependencies which are becoming risky in the evolving environment in order to identify needs for migration. <P12> BAC conformant environments could reduce overheads and, if standards supported the uniform management of records from the point of issue to the point of receipt. Could redundancy now imposed by both paper and electronic processes be dramatically reduced if records referenced other records? <P13>
Conclusions
RQ "All the proposed methods have some degree of external dependency. What are the implications software dependencies? Encapsulation, integrity controls and technico-social process are all software dependent. Is this avoidable? Can abstract reference models of the metadata captured by these methods serve to make them effectively software independent? " ... "What are the relative overhead costs of maintaining the systems which give adequate societal assurances of records retention following any of these approaches? Are there some strategies that are currently more efficient or effective? What are the organizational requirements for implementing metadata capture systems? In particular, what would the costs of building such systems within a single institution be versus the costs of implementing records metadata adhering communications servers on a universal scale?" ... "Can we model mechanisms to enable an integrated environment of recordkeeping throughout society for all electronically communicated transactions?" ... "Are the BAC structures workable? Complete? Extensible in ways that are known to be required? For example, metadata required for ÔÇ£recordnessÔÇØ is created at the time of the creation of the records but other metadata, as premised by the Warwick Framework, 2 may be created subsequently. Are these packets of metadata orthogonal with respect to recordness? If not, how are conflicts dealt with? " ... "Not all metadata references fixed facts. Thus, for example, we have premised that proper reference to a retention schedule is a citation to an external source rather than a date given within the metadata values of a record. Similar external references are required for administration of shifting access permissions. What role can registries (especially rights clearinghouses) play in a world of electronic records? How well do existing languages for permission management map to the requirements of records administration, privacy and confidentiality protection, security management, records retention and destruction, etc." ... "Not all records will be created with equally perfect metadata. Indeed risk-based decisions taken by organizations in structuring their recordsÔÇÖ capture are likely to result in conscious decisions to exclude certain evidential metadata. What are the implications of incomplete metadata on an individual organization level and on a societal level? Does the absence of data as a result of policy need to be noted? And if so, how?" ... "Since metadata has owners, howdo owners administer recordsÔÇÖ metadata over time? In particular, since records contain records, how are the layers of metadata exposed for management and administrative needs (if internal metadata documenting dependencies can slip through the migration process, we will end up with records that cannot serve as evidence. If protected records within unprotected records are not protected, we will end up with insecure records environments, etc. etc.)." ... "In principle, the BAC could be expressed as Dublin metadata 3 and insofar as it cannot be, the Dublin metadata will be inadequate for evidence. What other syntax could be used? How could these be comparatively tested?" .. "Could Dublin Core metadata, if extended by qualifying schema, serve the requirements of recordness? Records are, after all, documents in the Dublin sense of fixed information objects. What would the knowledge representation look like?" ... "Strategies for metadata capture currently locate the source of metadata either in the API layer, or the communications system, using data provided by the application (an analysis supports defining which data and where they can be obtained), from the user interface layer, or from the business rules defined for specified types of communication pathways. Can all the required metadata be obtained by some combination of these sources? In other words, can all the metadata be acquired from sources other than content created by the record-creator for the explicit and sole purpose of documentation (since such data is both suspect in itself and the demand for it is annoying to the end user)? " ... "Does the capture of metadata from the surrounding software layers require the implementation of a business-application specific engine, or can we design generic tools that provide the means by which even legacy computing systems can create evidential records if the communication process captures the interchange arising from a record-event and binds it with appropriate metadata?" ... "What kinds of representations of business processes and structures can best carry contextualizing metadata at this level of granularity and simultaneously serve end user requirements? Are the discovery and documentation representations of provenance going to have to be different? " ... "Can a generic level of representation of context be shared? Do standards such a STEP 4 provide adequate semantic rules to enable some meaningful exchange of business context information? " ... "Using past experiences of expired standards as an indicator, can the defined structural metadata support necessary migrations? Are the formal standards of the source and target environments adequate for actual record migration to occur?" ... "What metadata is required to document a migration itself?" ... "Reduction of redundancy requires record uses to impose post-creation metadata locks on records created with different retention and access controls. To what extent is the Warwick Framework relevant to these packets and can architectures be created to manage these without their costs exceeding the savings?" ... "A number of issues about proper implementation depend on the evolution (currently very rapid) of metadata strategies in the broader Internet community. Issues such as unique identification of records, external references for metadata values, models for metadata syntax, etc. cannot be resolved for records without reference to the ways in which the wider community is addressing them. Studies that are supported for metadata capture methods need to be aware of, and flexible in reference to, such developments."
Type
Journal
Title
When Documents Deceive: Trust and Provenance as New Factors for Information Retrieval in a Tangled Web
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Periodical Abbreviation
JASIST
Publication Year
2001
Volume
52
Issue
1
Pages
12
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons
Critical Arguements
"This brief and somewhat informal article outlines a personal view of the changing framework for information retrieval suggested by the Web environment, and then goes on to speculate about how some of these changes may manifest in upcoming generations of information retrieval systems. It also sketches some ideas about the broader context of trust management infrastructure that will be needed to support these developments, and it points towards a number of new research agendas that will be critical during this decade. The pursuit of these agendas is going to call for new collaborations between information scientists and a wide range of other disciplines." (p. 12) Discusses public key infrastructure (PKI) and Pretty Good Practice (PGP) systems as steps toward ensuring the trustworthiness of metadata online, but explains their limitations. Makes a distinction between the identify of providers of metadata and their behavior, arguing that it is the latter we need to be concerned with.
Phrases
<P1> Surrogates are assumed to be accurate because they are produced by trusted parties, who are the only parties allowed to contribute records to these databases. Documents (full documents or surrogate records) are viewed as passive; they do not actively deceive the IR system.... Compare this to the realities of the Web environment. Anyone can create any metadata they want about any object on the net, with any motivation. (p. 13) <P2> Sites interested in manipulating the results of the indexing process rapidly began to exploit the difference between the document as viewed by the user and the document as analyzed by the indexing crawler through a set of techniques broadly called "index spamming." <P3> Pagejacking might be defined generally as providing arbitrary documents with independent arbitrary index entries. Clearly, building information retrieval systems to cope with this environment is a huge problem. (p. 14) <P4> [T]he tools are coming into place that let one determine the source of a metadata assertion (or, more precisely and more generally) the identity of the person or organization that stands behind the assertion, and to establish a level of trust in this identity. (p. 16) <P5> It is essential to recognize that in the information retrieval context one is not concerned so much with identity as with behavior. ... This distinction is often overlooked or misunderstood in discussions about what problems PKI is likely to solve: identity alone does not necessarily solve the problem of whether to trust information provided by, or warranted by, that identity. ... And all of the technology for propagating trust, either in hierarchical (PKI) or web-of-trust identity management, is purely about trust in identity. (p. 16) <P6> The question of formalizing and recording expectations about behavior, or trust in behavior, are extraordinarily complex, and as far as I know, very poorly explored. (p. 16) <P7> [A]n appeal to certification or rating services simply shifts the problem: how are these services going to track, evaluate, and rate behavior, or certify skills and behavior? (p. 16) <P8> An individual should be able to decide how he or she is willing to have identity established, and when to believe information created by or associated with such an identity. Further, each individual should be able to have this personal database evolve over time based on experience and changing beliefs. (p. 16) <P9> [T]he ability to scale and to respond to a dynamic environment in which new information sources are constantly emerging is also vital.<P10> In determining what data a user (or an indexing system, which may make global policy decisions) is going to consider in matching a set of search criteria, a way of defining the acceptable level of trust in the identity of the source of the data will be needed. (p. 16) <P10> Only if the data is supported by both sufficient trust in the identity of the source and the behavior of that identity will it be considered eligible for comparison to the search criteria. Alternatively, just as ranking of result sets provided a more flexible model of retrieval than just deciding whether documents or surrogates did or did not match a group of search criteria, one can imagine developing systems that integrate confidence in the data source (both identity and behavior, or perhaps only behavior, with trust in identity having some absolute minimum value) into ranking algorithms. (p. 17) <P11> As we integrate trust and provenance into the next generations of information retrieval systems we must recognize that system designers face a heavy burden of responsibility. ... New design goals will need to include making users aware of defaults; encouraging personalization; and helping users to understand the behavior of retrieval systems <warrant> (p. 18) <P12> Powerful paternalistic systems that simply set up trust-related parameters as part of the indexing process and thus automatically apply a fixed set of such parameters to each search submitted to the retrieval system will be a real danger. (p. 17)
Conclusions
RQ "These developments suggest a research agenda that addresses indexing countermeasures and counter-countermeasures; ways of anonymously or pseudononymously spot-checking the results of Web-crawling software, and of identifying, filtering out, and punishing attempts to manipulate the indexing process such as query-source-sensitive responses or deceptively structured pages that exploit the gap between presentation and content." (p. 14) "Obviously, there are numerous open research problems in designing such systems: how can the user express these confidence or trust constraints; how should the system integrate them into ranking techniques; how can efficient index structures and query evaluation algorithms be designed that integrate these factors. ... The integration of trust and provenance into information retrieval systems is clearly going to be necessary and, I believe, inevitable. If done properly, this will inform and empower users; if done incorrectly, it threatens to be a tremendously powerful engine of censorship and control over information access. (p. 17)
Type
Journal
Title
Metadata Strategies and Archival Description: Comparing Apples to Oranges
Advocates of a "metadata systems approach" to the description of electronic records argue that metadata's capacity to provide descriptive information about the context of electronic records creation will obviate, or reduce significantly, the need for traditional archival description. This article examines the assumptions about the nature of archival description and of metadata on which metadata strategies are grounded, for the purposes of ascertaining the following: whether the skepticism concerning the capacity of traditional description to meet the challenges posed by the so-called "second generation" of electronic records is justified; whether the use of metadata as archival description is consistent with their nature and purpose; and whether metadata are capable of servinng archival descriptive purposes.
Critical Arguements
CA "Before the archival profession assigns to traditional archival description the diminished role of "added value" (i.e. accessory) or abandons it altogether, the assumptions about the nature of archival description and of metadata on which metadata strategies are grounded ought to be carefully examined. Such an examination is necessary to ascertain the following: whether the skepticism concerning the capacity of traditional description to meet the challenges posed by the so-called "second generation" of electronic records is justified, whether the use of metadata as archival description is consistent with their nature and purpose, and whether metadata are acapable of serving archival purposes."
Phrases
<P1> In an article published in Archivaria, David Wallace summarized recent writing on the subject of metadata and concluded that "[d]ata dictionaries and the types of metadata that they house and can be built to house should be seriously evaluated by archivists" because of their potential to signficantly improve and ultimately transform traditional archival practice in the areas of appraisal, arrangement, description, reference, and access. <warrant> <P2> In the area of description, specifically, advocates of "metadata management" or a "metadata systems approach" believe that metadata's capacity to provide descriptive information about the context of electronic records creation will obviate, or reduce significantly, the need for traditional description. <P3> Charles Dollar maintains that archival participation in the IRDS standard is essential to ensure that archival requirements, including descriptive requirements, are understood and adopted within it. <warrant> <P4> According to David Wallace, "archivists will need to concentrate their efforts on metadata systems creation rather than informational content descriptions, since in the electronic realm, archivists' concern for informational value will be eclipsed by concern for the evidential value of the system." <warrant> <P5> Charles Dollar, for his part, predicts that, rather than emphasize "the products of an information system," a metadata systems approach to description will focus on "an understanding of the information system context that supports organization-wide information sharing." <P6> Because their scope and context are comparitively narrow, metadata circumscribe and atomize these various contexts of records creation. Archival description, on the other hand, enlarges and integrates them. In so doing it reveals continuities and discontinuities in the matrix of function, structure, and record-keeping over time. <P7> Metadata are part of this broader context, since they constitute a series within the creator's fonds. The partial context provided by metadata should not, however, be mistaken for the whole context. <P8> Metadata, for example, may be capable of explaining contextual attributes of the data within an electronic records system, but they are incapable of describing themselves -- i.e., their own context of creation and use -- because they cannot be detached from themselves. For this reason, it is necessary to describe the context in which the metadata are created so that their meaning also will be preserved over time. <P9> A metadata system is like a diary that, in telegraphic style, records the daily events that take place in the life of an individual as they occur and from the individual's perspective. <P10> Archival description, it could be said, is the view from the plane; metadata, the view from the field as it is plowed. <P11> While a close-up shot-- such as the capture of a database view -- may be necessary for the purposes of preserving record context and system functionality, it does not follow that such a snapshot is necessary or even desirable for the purposes of description. <P12> Because the context revealed by metadata systems is so detailed, and the volume of transactions they capture is so enormous, metadata may in fact obscure, rather than illuminate, the broader administrative context and thereby bias the users' understanding of the records' meaning. In fact, parts of actions and transactions may develop entirely outside of the electronic system and never be included in the metadata. <P13> If the metadata are kept in their entirety, users searching for documents will have to wade through a great deal of irrelevant data to find what they need. If the metadata are chopped up into bits corresponding to what has been kept, how comprehensible will they be to the uesr? <P14> The tendency to describe metadata in metaphorical terms, e.g., in relation to archival inventories, has distracted attention from consideration of what metadata are in substantial, concrete terms. They are, in fact, records created and used in the conduct of affairs of which they form a part. <P15> The transactions captured by metadata systems may be at a more microscopic level than those captured in registers and the context may be more detailed, given the technological complexity of electronic record-keeping environments. Nevertheless, their function remains the same. <P16> And, like protocol registers, whose permanent retention is legislated, metadata need to be preserved in perpetuity because they are concrete evidence of what documents were made and received, who handled them, with what results, and the transactions to which they relate. <warrant> <P17> While it is true that metadata systems show or reveal the context in which transactions occur in an electronic system and therefore constitute a kind of description of it -- Jenkinson made the same observation about registers -- their real object is to record the fact of these transactions; they should be, like registers, "preserved as a [record] of the proceedings in that connection." <P18> Viewing metadata systems as tools for achieving archival purposes, rather than as tools for achieving the creators' purposes is dangerous because it encourages us to, in effect, privilege potential secondary uses of metadata over their actual primary use; in so doing, we could reshape such use for purposes other than the conduct of affairs of which they are a part. <P19> Metadata strategies risk compromising, specifically, the impartiality of the records' creation. <P20> For archivists to introduce in the formation of metadata records requirements directed toward the future needs of archivists and researchers rather than toward the current needs of the creator would contribute an element of self-consciousness into the records creation process that is inconsistent with the preservation of the records' impartiality. <P21> If the impartiality of the metadata is compromised, their value as evidence will be compromised, which means, ultimately, that the underlying objective of metadata strategies -- the preservation of evidence -- will be defeated. <P22> None of these objections should be taken to suggest that archivists do not have a role to play in the design and maintenance of metadata systems. It is, rather, to suggest that that role must be driven by our primary obligation to protect and preserve, to the extent possible, the essential characterisitcis of the archives. <P23> The proper role of an archivist in the design of a metadata system, then, is to assist the organization in identifying its own descriptive needs as well as to ensure that the identification process is driven, not by narrowly defined system requirements, but by the organization's overarching need and obligation to create and maintain complete, reliable, and authentic records. <P24> That is why it is essential that information holdings are identified and described in a meaningful way, organized in a logical manner that fascilitates their access, and preserved in a manner that permits their continuing use. <P25> Record-keeing requirements for electronic records must address the need to render documentary relationships wisible and to build in procedures for authentication and preservation; such measures will ensure that record-keeping systems meet the criteris of "intergrity, currency an relevancy" necessary to the records creator. <P26> In other words, effective description is a consequence of effective records management and intelligent appraisal, not their purpose. If the primary objectives of metadata are met, description will be fascilitated and the need for description at lower levels (e.g., below the series level) may even be obviated. <P27> Metadata systems cannot and should not replace archival description. To meet the challenges posed by electronic records, it is more important than ever that we follow the dictates of archival science, which begin from a consideration of the nature of archives. <P28> Archival participation in the design and maintenance of metadata systems must be driven by the need to preserve them as archival documents, that is, as evidence of actions and transactions, not as descriptive tools. Our role is not to promote our own intersts, but to deepen the creator's understanding of its interests in preserving the evidence of its own actions and transactions. We can contribute to that understanding because we have a broader view of the creator's needs over time. In supporting these interests, we indirectly promote our own. <P29> To ensure that our descriptive infrastructure is sound -- that is to say, comprehensible, flexible, efficient, and effective -- we need equally to analyze our own information management methods and, out of that analysis, to develop complementary systems of administrative and intellectual control that will build upon each other. By these means we will be able to accomodate the diversity and complexity of the record-keeping environments with which we must deal.
Conclusions
RQ "Since 'current metadata systems do not account for the provenancial and contextual information needed to manage archival records,' archivists are exhorted [by Margaret Hedstrom] to direct their research efforts (and research dollars) toward the identification of the types of metadata that ought to be captured and created to meet archival descriptive requirements. "
SOW
DC Dr. Heather MacNeil is an Assistant Professor at the School of Library, Archival, and Information Studies at the University of British Columbia. Dr. MacNeilÔÇÖs major areas of interests include: trends and themes in archival research & scholarship; arrangement and description of archival documents; management of current records; trustworthiness of records as evidence; protection of personal privacy; interdisciplinary perspectives on record trustworthiness; and archival preservation of authentic electronic records
Type
Journal
Title
Research Issues in Australian Approaches to Policy Development
Drawing on his experience at the Australian Archives in policy development on electronic records and recordkeeping for the Australian Federal Government sector the author argues for greater emphasis on the implementation side of electronic records management. The author questions whether more research is a priority over implementation. The author also argues that if archival institutions wish to be taken seriously by their clients they need to pay greater attention to getting their own organisations in order. He suggests the way to do this is by improving internal recordkeeping practices and systems and developing a resource and skills base suitable for the delivery of electronic recordkeeping policies and services to clients.
Publisher
Kluwer Academic Publishers
Publication Location
Netherlands
Critical Arguements
CA "None of the issues which have been raised regarding the management of electronic records are insurmountable or even difficult from a technological viewpoint. The technology is there to develop electronic recordkeeping systems. The technology is there to capture and maintain electronic records. The technology is there to enable access over time. The technology is there to enable recordkeeping at a level of sophistication and accuracy hitherto undreamt of. To achieve our goal though requires more than technology, remember that is part of the problem. To achieve our goal requires human understanding, planning, input and motivation and that requires us to convince others that it is worth doing. This view has a significant impact on the development of research agendas and implementation projects." (p. 252) "Looking at electronic records from a strategic recordkeeping perspective requires us to see beyond the specific technology issues toward the wider corporate issues, within our organizational, professional and environmental sectors. In summary they are: Building alliances: nationally and internationally; Re-inventing the archival function: cultural change in the archives and recordscommunity and institutions; Getting our own house in order: establishing archival institutions as models of best practice for recordkeeping; Devoting resources to strategic developments; and Re-training and re-skilling archivists and records managers." (p. 252-253)
Phrases
<P1> The issue for me therefore is the development of a strategic approach to recordkeeping, whether it be in Society generally, whole of Government, or in your own corporate environment. The wider focus should be on the development of recordkeeping systems, and specifically electronic recordkeeping systems. Without such a strategic approach I believe our efforts on electronic records will largely be doomed to failure. (p. 252) <P2> We have to influence recordkeeping practices in order to influence the creation and management of electronic records. (p. 253) <P3> Given that there is no universal agreement within the archives and records community to dealing with electronic records how can we expect to successfully influence other sectoral interests and stake-holders, not to mention policy makers and resource providers? Institutions and Professional bodies have to work together and reach agreement and develop strategic positions. (p. 253) <P4> The emerging role of recordkeeping professionals is to define recordkeeping regimes for organizations and their employees, acting as consultants and establishing and monitoring standards, rather than deciding about specific records in specific recordkeeping systems or creating extensive documentation about them. (p. 254) <P5> Archival institutions need to practice what they preach and develop as models for best practice in recordkeeping. (p. 254-255) <P6> Resources devoted to electronic records and recordkeeping policy and implementation within archival institutions has not been commensurate with the task. (p. 255) <P7> Contact with agencies needs to be more focused at middle and senior management to ensure that the importance of accountability and recordkeeping is appreciated and that strategies and systems are put in place to ensure that records are created, kept and remain accessible. (p. 255) <P8> In order to do this for electronic records archival institutions need to work with agencies to: assist in the development of recordkeeping systems through the provision of appropriate advice; identify electronic records in their custody which are of enduring value; identify and dispose of electronic records in their custody which are not of enduring value; assist agencies in the identification of information or metadata which needs to be captured and maintained; provide advice on access to archival electronic records. (p. 255-256) <P9> The elements of the records continuum need to be reflected as components in the business strategy for archival institutions in the provision of services to its clients. (p. 256)
Conclusions
RQ "In summary I see the unresolved issues and potential research tasks as follows: International Agreement (UN, ICA); National Agreement (Government, Corporate, Sectoral, Professional); Cultural Change in the Archives and Records Community; Re-inventing / re-engineering Archives institutions; Re-training or recruiting; Best practice sites -- the National Archives as a model for best practice recordkeeping; Test sites for creation, capture, migration and networking of records; Functional analysis and appraisal of electronic information systems (electronic recordkeeping systems); Costing the retention of electronic records and records in electronic form." (p. 257)
One such expedient could be more structured and more integrated use of formal and institutional data on records and archives. I cannot offer any completed model of this enhanced perspective, and as far as I know, one does not exist. However, it is a new way of thinking and looking at the problems we encounter. What I would like to do is draw attention to some of the approaches now being developed in The Netherlands. In a way, this presentation will therefore be a report on the Dutch arvhival situation.
Critical Arguements
CA "In a world defined by the enormous size of archives, where the multiplicity of records is in turn driven by the growing complexity of society and its administration, and by the proliferation of types of 'information carriers', it is becoming increasingly difficult fpr archivists to fulfill their primary tasks. It is therefore necessary to study carefully the development of maintenance and control mechanisms for archives. We cannot afford waste or overlook any possibility. It is also necessary to look around us, to discover what other archivists in other countries are doing, and what others in related fields, such as libraries and museums, have accomplished. Essentially, we all deal with the same problems and must try to find new solutions to master these problems."
Phrases
<P1> Document forms can be regarded as forms of objects. We probably need to gain more experience in recognizing different forms of documents and interpreting them, but once we have this knowledge, we can use it in the same way as we now use 'form' in its archival sense: to distinguish one object from another. <P2> In fact, by extension, one can even construct and defend the thesis that all decisions in an administration are reached using standard procedures and forms. Once this is realized, one can ask: what use to archivists make of this knowledge in their daily work? What are the possibilities? <P3> Often the forms of materials created prove to be of a more consistent nature than the offices that use them. If an office ceases its activity, another will take over its tasks and for the most part will use the same or almost the same forms of material. <P4> Understanding the functions of the organization will provide archivists not only with information about the material involved, but also with knowledge of the procedures, which in turn provides information about the records and their different forms. This kind of sympathetic understanding enables archivists to make all kinds of decisions, and it is important to note that at least part of this knowledge should be provided to the users, so that they can decide which records might be of interest to them. <warrant> <P5> We are increasingly aware that we must distinguish between processing an archive (i.e. organizing records according to archival principles after appraisal) and making the contents available for users through finding aids, indexes and other means. <P6> With respect to the latter, it is clear that archivists should make use of both context- and provenance-based indexing. They should take advantage of the possiblities offered by the structures and forms of material -- something which the librarian cannot do. Furthermore, they should also use content indexing in a selective way, only when they think it necessary [to] better serve researchers. <warrant> <P7> The National Archives in The Hague has responded to these new perspectives by developing a computer programme called MAIS (Micro Archives Inventory System), which is a formal way of processing archives based on provenance. <P8> The object of this presentation has been to show that use of structure, forms of material and functions, can aid the archivist in his/her work.
Conclusions
RQ "While these initial Dutch efforts have been produced in a rather unorganized way, it should nevertheless be possible to approach the work more systematically in [the] future, building up a body of knowledge of forms for users of archives. David Bearman has offered some preliminary suggestions in this direction, in the article cited above; it is now a matter of more research required to realize something positive in this field."
SOW
DC J. Peter Sigmond is Director of Collections at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Type
Journal
Title
Structuring the Records Continuum Part Two: Structuration Theory and Recordkeeping
In the previous issue of Archives and Manuscripts I presented the first part of this two part exploration. It dealt with some possible meanings for 'post' in the term postcustodial. For archivists, considerations of custody are becoming more complex because of changing social, technical and legal considerations. These changes include those occurring in relation to access and the need to document electronic business communications reliably. Our actions, as archivists, in turn become more complex as we attempt to establish continuity of custody in electronic recordkeeping environments. In this part, I continue the case for emphasising the processes of archiving in both our theory and practice. The archives as a functional structure has dominated twentieth century archival discourse and institutional ordering, but we are going through a period of transformation. The structuration theory of Anthony Giddens is used to show that there are very different ways of theorising about our professional activities than have so far been attempted within the archival profession. Giddens' theory, at the very least, provides a useful device for gaining insights into the nature of theory and its relationship with practice. The most effective use of theory is as a way of seeing issues. When seen through the prism of structuration theory, the forming processes of the virtual archives are made apparent.
Critical Arguements
CA "This part of my exploration of the continuum will continue the case for understanding 'postcustodial' as a bookmark term for a major transition in archival practice. That transition involves leaving a long tradition in which continuity was a matter of sequential control. Electronic recordkeeping processes need to incorporate continuity into the essence of recordkeeping systems and into the lifespan of documents within those systems. In addressing this issue I will present a structurationist reading of the model set out in Part 1, using the sophisticated theory contained in the work of Anthony Giddens. Structuration theory deals with process, and illustrates why we must constantly re-assess and adjust the patterns for ordering our activities. It gives some leads on how to go about re-institutionalising these new patterns. When used in conjunction with continuum thinking, Giddens' meta-theory and its many pieces can help us to understand the complexities of the virtual archives, and to work our way towards the establishment of suitable routines for the control of document management, records capture, corporate memory, and collective memory."
Phrases
<P1> Broadly the debate has started to form itself as one between those who represent the structures and functions of an archival institution in an idealised form, and those who increasingly concentrate on the actions and processes which give rise to the record and its carriage through time and space. In one case the record needs to be stored, recalled and disseminated within our institutional frameworks; in the other case it is the processes for storing, recalling, and disseminating the record which need to be placed into a suitable framework. <P2> Structure, for Giddens, is not something separate from human action. It exists as memory, including the memory contained within the way we represent, recall, and disseminate resources including recorded information. <P3> Currently in electronic systems there is an absence of recordkeeping structures and disconnected dimensions. The action part of the duality has raced ahead of the structural one; the structuration process has only just begun. <P4> The continuum model's breadth and richness as a conceptual tool is expanded when it is seen that it can encompass action-structure issues in at least three specialisations within recordkeeping: contemporary recordkeeping - current recordkeeping actions and the structures in which they take place; regulatory recordkeeping - the processes of regulation and the enabling and controlling structures for action such as policies, standards, codes, legislation, and promulgation of best practices; historical recordkeeping - explorations of provenance in which action and structure are examined forensically as part of the data sought about records for their storage, recall and dissemination. <P5> The capacity to imbibe information about recordkeeping practices in agencies will be crucial to the effectiveness of the way archival 'organisations' set up their postcustodial programs. They will have to monitor the distribution and exercise of custodial responsibilities for electronic records from before the time of their creation. <warrant> <P6> As John McDonald has pointed out, recordkeeping activities need to occur at desktop level within systems that are not dependent upon the person at the desktop understanding all of the details of the operation of that system. <P7> Giddens' more recent work on reflexivity has many parallels with metadata approaches to recordkeeping. What if the records, as David Bearman predicts, can be self-managing? Will they be able to monitor themselves? <P8> He rejects the life cycle model in sociology, based on ritualised passages through life, and writes of 'open experience thresholds'. Once societies, for example, had rites for coming of age. Coming of age in a high modern society is now a complex process involving a host of experiences and risks which are very different to that of any previous generation. Open experience threshholds replace the life cycle thresholds, and as the term infers, are much less controlled or predictable. <P9> There is a clear parallel with recordkeeping in a high modern environment. The custodial thresholds can no longer be understood in terms of the spatial limits between a creating agency and an archives. The externalities of the archives as place will decline in significance as a means of directly asserting the authenticity and reliability of records. The complexities of modern recordkeeping involve many more contextual relationships and an ever increasing network of relationships between records and the actions that take place in relation to them. We have no need for a life cycle concept based on the premise of generational repetition of stages through which a record can be expected to pass. We have entered an age of more recordkeeping choices and of open experience thresholds. <P10> It is the increase in transactionality, and the technologies being used for those transactions, which are different. The solution, easier to write about than implement, is for records to parallel Giddens' high modern individual and make reflexive use of the broader social environment in which they exist. They can reflexively monitor their own action and, with encoding help from archivists and records managers, resolve their own crises as they arise. <warrant> <P11> David Bearman's argument that records can be self-managing goes well beyond the easy stage. It is supported by the Pittsburgh project's preliminary set of metadata specifications. The seeds of self-management can be found in object oriented programming, java, applets, and the growing understanding of the importance and nature of metadata. <P12> Continuum models further assist us to conceive of how records, as metadata encapsulated objects, can resolve many of their own life crises as they thread their way through time and across space. <P13> To be effective monitors of action, archival institutions will need to be recognised by others as the institutions most capable of providing guidance and control in relation to the integration of the archiving processes involved in document management, records capture, the organisation of corporate memory and the networking of archival systems. <warrant> <P14> Signification, in the theoretical domain, refers to our interpretative schemes and the way we encode and communicate our activities. At a macro level this includes language itself; at a micro level it can include our schemes for classification and ordering. <P15> The Pittsburgh project addressed the three major strands of Giddens' theoretical domain. It explored and set out functional requirements for evidence - signification. It sought literary warrants for archival tasks - legitimation. It reviewed the acceptability of the requirements for evidence within organisational cultures - domination. <P16> In Giddens' dimensional approach, the theoretical domain is re-defined to be about coding, organising our resources, and developing norms and standards. In this area the thinking has already begun to produce results, which leads this article in to a discussion of structural properties. <P17> Archivists deal with structural properties when, for example, they analyse the characteristics of recorded information such as the document, the record, the archive and the archives. The archives as a fortress is an observable structural property, as is the archives as a physical accumulation of records. Within Giddens' structuration theory, when archivists write about their favourite features, be they records or the archives as a place, they are discussing structural properties. <P18> Postcustodial practice in Australia is already beginning to put together a substantial array of structural properties. These developments are canvassed in the article by O'Shea and Roberts in the previous issue of Archives and Manuscripts. They include policies and strategies, standards, recordkeeping regimes, and what has come to be termed distributed custody. <P19> As [Terry] Eastwood comments in the same article, we do not have adequate electronic recordkeeping systems. Without them there can be no record in time-space to serve any form of accountability. <warrant> <P20> In the Pittsburgh project, for example, the transformation of recordkeeping processes is directed towards the creation and management of evidence, and possible elements of a valid rule-resource set have emerged. Elements can include the control of recordkeeping actions, accountability, the management of risk, the development of recordkeeping regimes, the establishment of recordkeeping requirements, and the specification of metadata. <P21> In a postcustodial approach it is the role of archival institutions to foster better recordkeeping practices within all the dimensions of recordkeeping. <warrant>
Conclusions
RQ "Best practice in the defence of the authoritative qualities of records can no longer be viewed as a linear chain, and the challenge is to establish new ways of legitimating responsibilities for records storage and custody which recognise the shifts which have occurred." ... "The recordkeeping profession should seek to establish itself as ground cover, working across terrains rather than existing tree-like in one spot. Beneath the ground cover there are shafts of specialisation running both laterally and vertically. Perhaps we can, as archivists, rediscover something that a sociologist like Giddens has never forgotten. Societies, including their composite parts, are the ultimate containers of recorded information. As a place in society, as Terry Cook argues, the archives is a multiple reality. We can set in train policies and strategies that can help generate multiplicity without losing respect for particular mine shafts. Archivists have an opportunity to pursue policies which encourage the responsible exercising of a custodial role throughout society, including the professions involved in current, regulatory and historical recordkeeping. If we take up that opportunity, our many goals can be better met and our concerns will be addressed more effectively."
SOW
DC "Frank Upward is a senior lecturer in the Department of Librarianship, Archives and Records at Monash University. He is an historian of the ideas contained in the Australian records continuum approach, and an ex- practitioner within that approach." ... "These two articles, and an earlier one on Ian Maclean and the origins of Australian continuum thinking, have not, so far, contained appropriate acknowledgements. David Bearman provided the necessary detonation of certain archival practices, and much more. Richard Brown and Terry Cook drew my attention to Anthony Giddens' work and their own work has helped shape my views. I have many colleagues at Monash who encourage my eccentricities. Sue McKemmish has helped shape my ideas and my final drafts and Barbara Reed has commented wisely on my outrageous earlier drafts. Livia Iacovino has made me stop and think more about the juridical tradition in recordkeeping. Chris Hurley produced many perspectives on the continuum during the 1996 seminars which have helped me see the model more fully. Don Schauder raised a number of key questions about Giddens as a theorist. Bruce Wearne of the Sociology Department at Monash helped me lift the clarity of my sociological explanations and made me realise how obsessed Giddens is with gerunds. The structural-functionalism of Luciana Duranti and Terry Eastwood provided me with a counterpoint to many of my arguments, but I also owe them debts for their respective explorations of recordkeeping processes and the intellectual milieu of archival ideas, and for their work on the administrative-juridical tradition of recordkeeping. Glenda Acland has provided perceptive comments on my articles - and supportive ones, for which I am most grateful given how different the articles are from conventional archival theorising. Australian Archives, and its many past and present staff members, has been important to me."
Type
Journal
Title
Structuring the Records Continuum Part One: Post-custodial principles and properties
The records continuum is becoming a much used term, but has seldom been defined in ways which show it is a time/space model not a life of the records model. Dictionary definitions of a continuum describe such features as its continuity, the indescernibility of its parts, and the way its elements pass into each other. Precise definitions, accordingly, have to discern the indiscernible, identify points that are not distinct, and do so in ways which accomodate the continuity of change. This article, and a second part to be published in the next volume, will explore the continuum in time/space terms supported by a theoretical mix of archival science, postmodernity and the 'structuration theory' of Anthony Giddens. In this part the main objectives are to give greater conceptual firmness to the continuum; to clear the way for broader considerations of the nature of the continuum by freeing archivists from the need to debate custody; to show how the structural principles for archival practice are capable of different expression without losing contact with something deeper that can outlive the manner of expression.
Critical Arguements
CA "This is the first instalment of a two part article exploring the records continuum. Together the articles will build into a theory about the constitution of the virtual archives. In this part I will examine what it can mean to be 'postcustodial', outline some possible structural principles for the virtual archives, and present a logical model for the records continuum." ... "In what follows in the remainder of this article (and all of the next) , I will explore the relevance of [Anthony] Giddens' theory to the structuring of the records continuum."
Phrases
<P1> If the archival profession is to avoid a fracture along the lines of paper and electronic media, it has to be able to develop ways of expressing its ideas in models of relevance to all ages of recordkeeping, but do so in ways which are contemporaneous with our own society. <warrant> <P2> We need more of the type of construct provided by the Pittsburgh Project's functional requirements for evidence which are 'high modern' but can apply to recordkeeping over time. <P3> What is essential is for electronic records to be identified, controlled and accessible for as long as they have value to Government and the Community. <warrant> <P4> We have to face up to the complexification of ownership, possession, guardianship and control within our legal system. Even possession can be broken down into into physical possession and constructed possession. We also have to face the potential within our technology for ownership, possession, custody or control to be exercised jointly by the archives, the organisation creating the records, and auditing agencies. The complexity requires a new look at our way of allocating authorities and responsibilities. <P5> In what has come to be known as the continuum approach Maclean argued that archivists should base their profession upon studies of the characteristics of recorded information, recordkeeping systems, and classification (the way the records were ordered within recordkeeping systems and the way these were ordered through time). <P6> A significant role for today's archival institution is to help to identify and establish functional requirements for recordkeeping that enable a more systematic approach to authentication than that provided by physical custody. <warrant> <P7> In an electronic work environment it means, in part, that the objectivity, understandability, availability, and usability of records need to be inherent in the way that the record is captured. In turn the documents need to be captured in the context of the actions of which they are part, and are recursively involved. <warrant> <P8>A dimensional analysis can be constructed from the model and explained in a number of ways including a recordkeeping system reading. When the co-ordinates of the continuum model are connected, the different dimensions of a recordkeeping system are revealed. The dimensions are not boundaries, the co-ordinates are not invariably present, and things may happen simultaneously across dimensions, but no matter how a recordkeeping system is set up it can be analysed in terms such as: first dimensional analysis: a pre- communication system for document creation within electronic systems [creating the trace]; second dimensional analysis: a post- communication system, for example traditional registry functionality which includes registration, the value adding of data for linking documents and disseminating them, and the maintenance of the record including disposition data [capturing trace as record]; third dimensional analysis: a system involving building, recalling and disseminating corporate memory [organising the record as memory]; fourth dimensional analysis: a system for building, recalling and disseminating collective memory (social, cultural or historical) including information of the type required for an archival information system [pluralizing the memory]. <P9> In the high modern recordkeeping environment of the 1990's a continuum has to take into account a different array of recordkeeping tools. These tools, plucking a few out at random but ordering the list dimensionally, include: document management software, Australian records system software, the intranet and the internet. <P10> In terms of a records continuum which supports an evidence based recordkeeping approach, the second dimension is crucial. This is where the document is disembedded from the immediate contexts of the first dimension. It is this disembedding process that gives the record its value as a 'symbolic token'. A document is embedded in an act, but the document as a record needs to be validatable using external reference points. These points include the operation of the recordkeeping system into which it was received, and information pertaining to the technical, social (including business) and communication processes of which the document was part.
Conclusions
RQ "Postcustodial approaches to archives and records cannot be understood if they are treated as a dualism. They are not the opposite of custody. They are a response to opportunities for asserting the role of an archives - and not just its authentication role - in many re-invigorating ways, a theme which I will explore further in the next edition of Archives and Manuscripts."
SOW
DC "Frank Upward is a senior lecturer in the Department of Librarianship, Archives and Records at Monash University. He is an historian of the ideas contained in the Australian records continuum approach, and an ex-practitioner within that approach."
Type
Journal
Title
The role of standards in the archival management of electronic records
CA Technical standards, developed by national and international organizations, are increasingly important in electronic recordkeeping. Thirteen standards are summarized and their sponsoring organizations described.
Phrases
<P1> The challenge to archivists is to make sure that the standards being applied to electronic records systems today are adequate to ensure the long-term preservation and use of information contained in the systems. (p.31) <P2> While consensus can easily be established that data exchange standards offer a wealth of potential benefits, there are also a number of real barriers to implementation that make the road ahead for archivists a very bumpy one. (p.41)
Conclusions
RQ What the current state of standardization in the archival management of electronic records and what are the issues involved?
Type
Journal
Title
Managing the Present: Metadata as Archival Description
Traditional archival description undertaken at the terminal stages of the life cycle has had two deleterious effects on the archival profession. First, it has resulted in enormous, and in some cases, insurmountable processing backlogs. Second, it has limited our ability to capture crucial contextual and structural information throughout the life cycle of record-keeping systems that are essential for fully understanding the fonds in our institutions. This shortcoming has resulted in an inadequate knowledge base for appraisal and access provision. Such complications will only become more magnified as distributed computering and complex software applications continue to expand throughout organizations. A metadata strategy for archival description will help mitigate these problems and enhance the organizational profile of archivists who will come to be seen as valuable organizational knowledge and accountability managers.
Critical Arguements
CA "This essay affirms this call for evaluation and asserts that the archival profession must embrace a metadata systems approach to archival description and management." ... "It is held here that the requirements for records capture and description are the requirements for metadata."
Phrases
<P1> New archival organizational structures must be created to ensure that records can be maintained in a usable form. <warrant> <P2> The recent report of Society of American Archivists (SAA) Committee on Automated Records and Techniques (CART) on curriculum development has argued that archivists need to "understand the nature and utility of metadata and how to interpret and use metadata for archival purposes." <warrant> <P3> The report advises archivists to acquire knowledge on the meanings of metadata, its structures, standards, and uses for the management of electronic records. Interestingly, the requirements for archival description immediately follow this section and note that archivists need to isolate the descriptive requirements, standards, documentiation, and practices needed for managing electronic records. <warrant> <P4> Clearly, archivists need to identify what types of metadata will best suit their descriptive needs, underscoring the need for the profession to develop strategies aand tactics to satisfy these requirements within active software environments. <warrant> <P5> Underlying the metadata systems strategy for describing and managing electronic information technologies is the seemingly universal agreement amongst electronic records archivists on the requirement to intervene earlier in the life cycle of electronic information systems. <warrant> <P6> Metadata has loomed over the archival management of electronic records for over five years now and is increasingly being promised as a basic control strategy for managing these records. <warrant> <P7> However, she [Margaret Hedstrom] also warns that as descriptive practices shift from creating descriptive information to capturing description along with the records, archivists may discover that managing the metadata is a much greater challenge than managing the records themselves. <P8> Archivists must seek to influence the creation of record-keeping systems within organizations by connecting the transaction that created the data to the data itself. Such a connection will link informational content, structure, and the context of transactions. Only when these conditions are met will we have records and an appropriate infrastructure for archival description. <warrant> <P9> Charles Dollar has argued that archivists increasingly will have to rely upon and shape the metadata associated with electronic records in order to fully capture provenance information about them. <warrant> <P10> Bearman proposes a metadata systems strategy, which would focus more explicitly on the context out of which records arise, as opposed to concentrating on their content. This axiom is premised on the assumption that "lifecycle records systems control should drive provenance-based description and link to top-down definitions of holdings." <warrant> <P11> Bearman and Margaret Hedstrom have built upon this model and contend that properly specified metadata capture could fully describe sytems while they are still active and eliminate the need for post-hoc description. The fundamental change wrought in this approach is the shift from doing things to records (surveying, scheduling, appraising, disposing/accessioning, describing, preserving, and accessing) to providing policy direction for adequate documentation through management of organizational behavior (analyzing organizational functions, defining business transactions, defining record metadata, indentifying control tactics, and establishing the record-keeping regime). Within this model archivists focus on steering how records will be captured (and that they will be captured) and how they will be managed and described within record-keeping systems while they are still actively serving their parent organization. <P12> Through the provision of policy guidance and oversight, organizational record-keeping is managed in order to ensure that the "documentation of organizational missions, functions, and responsibilities ... and reporting relationships within the organization, will be undertaken by the organizations themselves in their administrative control systems." <warrant> <P13> Through a metadata systems approach, archivists can realign themselves strategically as managers of authoritative information about organizational record-keeping systems, providing for the capture of information about each system, its contextual attributes, its users, its hardware configurations, its software configurations, and its data configurations. <warrant> <P14> The University of Pittsburgh's functional requirements for record-keeping provides a framework for such information management structure. These functional requirements are appropriately viewed as an absolute ideal, requiring testing within live systems and organizations. If properly implemented, however, they can provide a concrete model for metadata capture that can automatically supply many of the types of descriptive information both desired by archivists and required for elucidating the context out of which records arise. <P15> It is possible that satisfying these requirements will contribute to the development of a robust archival description process integrating "preservation of meaning, exercise of control, and provision of access'" within "one prinicipal, multipurpose descriptive instrument" hinted at by Luciana Duranti as a possible outcome of the electronic era. <P16> However, since electronic records are logical and not physical entities, there is no physical effort required to access and process them, just mental modelling. <P17> Depending on the type of metadata that is built into and linked to electronic information systems, it is possible that users can identify individual records at the lowest level of granularity and still see the top-level process it is related to. Furthermore, records can be reaggregated based upon user-defined criteria though metadata links that track every instance of their use, their relations to other records, and the actions that led to their creation. <P18> A metadata strategy for archival description will help to mitigate these problems and enhance the organizational profile of archivists, who will come to be seen as valuable organizational knowledge and accountability managers. <warrant>
Conclusions
RQ "First and foremost, the promise of metadata for archival description is contingent upon the creation of electronic record-keeping systems as opposed to a continuation of the data management orientation that seems to dominate most computer applications within organizations." ... "As with so many other aspects of the archival endeavour, these requirements and the larger metadata model for description that they are premised upon necessitate further exploration through basic research."
SOW
DC "In addition to New York State, recognition of the failure of existing software applications to capture a full compliment of metadata required for record-keeping and the need for such records management control has also been acknowledged in Canada, the Netherlands, and the World Bank." ... "In conjunction with experts in electronic records managment, an ongoing research project at the University of Pittsburgh has developed a set of thirteen functional requirements for record-keeping. These requirements provide a concrete metadata tool sought by archivists for managing and describing electronic records and electronic record-keeping systems." ... David A. Wallace is an Assistant Professor at the School of Information, University of Michigan, where he teaches in the areas of archives and records management. He holds a B.A. from Binghamton University, a Masters of Library Science from the University at Albany, and a doctorate from the University of Pittsburgh. Between 1988 and 1992, he served as Records/Systems/Database Manager at the National Security Archive in Washington, D.C., a non-profit research library of declassified U.S. government records. While at the NSA he also served as Technical Editor to their "The Making of U.S. Foreign Policy" series. From 1993-1994, he served as a research assistant to the University of Pittsburgh's project on Functional Requirements for Evidence in Recordkeeping, and as a Contributing Editor to Archives and Museum Informatics: Cultural Heritage Informatics Quarterly. From 1994 to 1996, he served as a staff member to the U.S. Advisory Council on the National Information Infrastructure. In 1997, he completed a dissertation analyzing the White House email "PROFS" case. Since arriving at the School of Information in late 1997, he has served as Co-PI on an NHPRC funded grant assessing strategies for preserving electronic records of collaborative processes, as PI on an NSF Digital Government Program funded planning grant investigating the incorporation of born digital records into a FOIA processing system, co-edited Archives and the Public Good: Accountability and Records in Modern Society (Quorum, 2002), and was awarded ARMA International's Britt Literary Award for an article on email policy. He also serves as a consultant to the South African History Archives Freedom of Information Program and is exploring the development of a massive digital library of declassified imaged/digitized U.S. government documents charting U.S. foreign policy.
Type
Electronic Journal
Title
Search for Tomorrow: The Electronic Records Research Program of the U.S. National Historical Publications and Records Commission
The National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) is a small grant-making agency affiliated with the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. The Commission is charged with promoting the preservation and dissemination of documentary source materials to ensure an understanding of U.S. history. Recognizing that the increasing use of computers created challenges for preserving the documentary record, the Commission adopted a research agenda in 1991 to promote research and development on the preservation and continued accessibility of documentary materials in electronic form. From 1991 to the present the Commission awarded 31 grants totaling $2,276,665 for electronic records research. Most of this research has focused on two issues of central concern to archivists: (1) electronic record keeping (tools and techniques to manage electronic records produced in an office environment, such as word processing documents and electronic mail), and (2) best practices for storing, describing, and providing access to all electronic records of long-term value. NHPRC grants have raised the visibility of electronic records issues among archivists. The grants have enabled numerous archives to begin to address electronic records problems, and, perhaps most importantly, they have stimulated discussion about electronic records among archivists and records managers.
Publisher
Elsevier Science Ltd
Critical Arguements
CA "The problem of maintaining electronic records over time is big, expensive, and growing. A task force on digital archives established by the Commission on Preservation and Access in 1994 commented that the life of electronic records could be characterized in the same words Thomas Hobbes once used to describe life: ÔÇ£nasty, brutish, and shortÔÇØ [1]. Every day, thousands of new electronic files are created on federal, state, and local government computers across the nation. A small but important portion of these records will be designated for permanent retention. Government agencies are increasingly relying on computers to maintain information such as census files, land titles, statistical data, and vital records. But how should electronic records with long-term value be maintained? Few government agencies have developed comprehensive policies for managing current electronic records, much less preserving those with continuing value for historians and other researchers. Because of this serious and growing problem, the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC), a small grantmaking agency affiliated with the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), has been making grants for research and development on the preservation and use of electronic documentary sources. The program is conducted in concert with NARA, which in 1996 issued a strategic plan that gives high priority to mastering electronic records problems in partnership with federal government agencies and the NHPRC.
Phrases
<P1> How can data dictionaries, information resource directory systems, and other metadata systems be used to support electronic records management and archival requirements? <P2> In spite of the number of projects the Commission has supported, only four questions from the research agenda have been addressed to date. Of these, the question relating to requirements for the development of data dictionaries and other metadata systems (question number four) has produced a single grant for a state information locator system in South Carolina, and the question relating to needs for archival education (question 10) has led to two grants to the Society of American Archivists for curricular materials. <P3> Information systems created without regard for these considerations may have deficiencies that limit the usefulness of the records contained on them. <warrant> <P4> The NHPRC has awarded major grants to four institutions over the past five years for projects to develop and test requirements for electronic record keeping: University of Pittsburgh (1993): A working set of functional requirements and metadata specifications for electronic record keeping systems; City of Philadelphia (1995, 1996, and 1997): A project to incorporate a subset of the Pittsburgh metadata specifications into a new human resources information system and other city systems as test cases and to develop comprehensive record keeping policies and standards for the cityÔÇÖs information technology systems; Indiana University (1995): A project to develop an assessment tool and methodology for analyzing existing electronic records systems, using the Pittsburgh functional requirements as a model and the student academic record system and a financial system as test cases; Research Foundation of the State University of New York-Albany, Center for Technology in Government (1996): A project to identify best practices for electronic record keeping, including work by the U.S. Department of Defense and the University of British Columbia in addition to the University of Pittsburgh. The Center is working with the stateÔÇÖs Adirondack Parks Agency in a pilot project to develop a system model for incorporating record keeping and archival considerations into the creation of networked computing and communications applications. <P5> No definitive solution has yet been identified for the problems posed by electronic records, although progress has been made in learning what will be needed to design functional electronic record keeping systems. <P6> With the proliferation of digital libraries, the need for long-term storage, migration and retrieval strategies for electronic information has become a priority for a wide variety of information providers. <warrant>
Conclusions
RQ "How best to preserve existing and future electronic formats and provide access to them over time has remained elusive. The answers cannot be found through theoretical research alone, or even through applied research, although both are needed. Answers can only emerge over time as some approaches prove able to stand the test of time and others do not. The problems are large because the costs of maintaining, migrating, and retrieving electronic information continue to be high." ... "Perhaps most importantly, these grants have stimulated widespread discussion of electronic records issues among archivists and record managers, and thus they have had an impact on the preservation of the electronic documentary record that goes far beyond the CommissionÔÇÖs investment."
SOW
DC The National Historic Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) is the outreach arm of the National Archives and makes plans for and studies issues related to the preservation, use and publication of historical documents. The Commission also makes grants to non-Federal archives and other organizations to promote the preservation use of America's documentary heritage.
Type
Report
Title
Mapping of the Encoded Archival Description DTD Element Set to the CIDOC CRM
The CIDOC CRM is the first ontology designed to mediate contents in the area of material cultural heritage and beyond, and has been accepted by ISO TC46 as work item for an international standard. The EAD Document Type Definition (DTD) is a standard for encoding archival finding aids using the Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML). Archival finding aids are detailed guides to primary source material which provide fuller information than that normally contained within cataloging records. 
Publisher
Institute of Computer Science, Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas
Publication Location
Heraklion, Crete, Greece
Language
English
Critical Arguements
CA "This report describes the semantic mapping of the current EAD DTD Version 1.0 Element Set to the CIDOC CRM and its latest extension. This work represents a proof of concept for the functionality the CIDOC CRM is designed for." 
Conclusions
RQ "Actually, the CRM seems to do the job quite well ÔÇô problems in the mapping arise more from underspecification in the EAD rather than from too domain-specific notions. "┬á... "To our opinion, the archival community could benefit from the conceptualizations of the CRM to motivate more powerful metadata standards with wide interoperability in the future, to the benefit of museums and other disciplines as well."
SOW
DC "As a potential international standard, the EAD DTD is maintained in the Network Development and MARC Standards Office of the Library of Congress in partnership with the Society of American Archivists." ... "The CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (see [CRM1999], [Doerr99]), in the following only referred to as ┬½CRM┬╗, is outcome of an effort of the Documentation Standards Group of the CIDOC Committee (see ┬½http:/www.cidoc.icom.org┬╗, ÔÇ£http://cidoc.ics.forth.grÔÇØ) of ICOM, the International Council of Museums beginning in 1996."
This document provides some background on preservation metadata for those interested in digital preservation. It first attempts to explain why preservation metadata is seen as an essential part of most digital preservation strategies. It then gives a broad overview of the functional and information models defined in the Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS) and describes the main elements of the Cedars outline preservation metadata specification. The next sections take a brief look at related metadata initiatives, make some recommendations for future work and comment on cost issues. At the end there are some brief recommendations for collecting institutions and the creators of digital content followed by some suggestions for further reading.
Critical Arguements
CA "This document is intended to provide a brief introduction to current preservation metadata developments and introduce the outline metadata specifications produced by the Cedars project. It is aimed in particular at those who may have responsibility for digital preservation in the UK further and higher education community, e.g. senior staff in research libraries and computing services. It should also be useful for those undertaking digital content creation (digitisation) initiatives, although it should be noted that specific guidance on this is available elsewhere. The guide may also be of interest to other kinds of organisations that have an interest in the long-term management of digital resources, e.g. publishers, archivists and records managers, broadcasters, etc. This document aimes to provide: A rationale for the creation and maintenance of preservation metadata to support digital preservation strategies, e.g. migration or emulation; An introduction to the concepts and terminology used in the influential ISO Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS); Brief information on the Cedars outline preservation metadata specification and the outcomes of some related metadata initiatives; Some notes on the cost implications of preservation metadata and how these might be reduced.
Conclusions
RQ "In June 2000, a group of archivists, computer scientists and metadata experts met in the Netherlands to discuss metadata developments related to recordkeeping and the long-term preservation of archives. One of the key conclusions made at this working meeting was that the recordkeeping metadata communities should attempt to co-operate more with other metatdata initiatives. The meeting also suggested research into the contexts of creation and use, e.g. identifying factors that might encourage or discourage creators form meeting recordkeeping metadata requirements. This kind of research would also be useful for wider preservation metadata developments. One outcome of this meeting was the setting up of an Archiving Metadata Forum (AMF) to form the focus of future developments." ... "Future work on preservation metadata will need to focus on several key issues. Firstly, there is an urgent need for more practical experience of undertaking digital preservation strategies. Until now, many preservation metadata initiatives have largely been based on theoretical considerations or high-level models like the OAIS. This is not in itself a bad thing, but it is now time to begin to build metadata into the design of working systems that can test the viability of digital preservation strategies in a variety of contexts. This process has already begun in initiatives like the Victorian Electronic Records Stategy and the San Diego Supercomputer Center's 'self-validating knowledge-based archives'. A second need is for increased co-operation between the many metadata initiatives that have an interest in digital preservation. This may include the comparison and harmonisation of various metadata specifications, where this is possible. The OCLC/LG working group is an example of how this has been taken forward whitin a particular domain. There is a need for additional co-operation with recordkeeping metadata specialists, computing scientists and others in the metadata research community. Thirdly, there is a need for more detailed research into how metadata will interact with different formats, preservation strategies and communities of users. This may include some analysis of what metadata could be automatically extracted as part of the ingest process, an investigation of the role of content creators in metadata provision, and the production of user requirements." ... "Also, thought should be given to the development of metadata standards that will permit the easy exchange of preservation metadata (and information packages) between repositories." ... "As well as ensuring that digital repositories are able to facilitate the automatic capture of metadata, some thought should also be given to how best digital repositories could deal with any metadata that might already exist."
SOW
DC "Funded by JISC (the Joint Information Systems Committee of the UK higher education funding councils), as part of its Electronic Libraries (eLib) Programme, Cedars was the only project in the programme to focus on digital preservation." ... "In the digitial library domain, the development of a recommendation on preservation metadata is being co-ordinated by a working group supported by OCLC and the RLG. The membership of the working group is international, and inlcudes key individuals who were involved in the development of the Cedars, NEDLIB and NLA metadata specifications."
Type
Web Page
Title
Schema Registry: activityreports: Recordkeeping Metadata Standard for Commonwealth Agencies
CA "The Australian SPIRT Recordkeeping Metadata Project was initially a project funded under a programme known as the Strategic Partnership with Industry -- Research and Training (SPIRT) Support Grant -- partly funded by the Australian Research Council. The project was concerned with developing a framework for standardising and defining recordkeeping metadata and produced a metadata element set eventually known as the Australian Recordkeeping Metadata Schema (RKMS). The conceptual frame of reference in the project was based in Australian archival practice, including the Records Continuum Model and the Australian Series System. The RKMS also inherits part of the Australian Government Locator Service (AGLS) metadata set."
The creation and use of metadata is likely to become an important part of all digital preservation strategies whether they are based on hardware and software conservation, emulation or migration. The UK Cedars project aims to promote awareness of the importance of digital preservation, to produce strategic frameworks for digital collection management policies and to promote methods appropriate for long-term preservation - including the creation of appropriate metadata. Preservation metadata is a specialised form of administrative metadata that can be used as a means of storing the technical information that supports the preservation of digital objects. In addition, it can be used to record migration and emulation strategies, to help ensure authenticity, to note rights management and collection management data and also will need to interact with resource discovery metadata. The Cedars project is attempting to investigate some of these issues and will provide some demonstrator systems to test them.
Notes
This article was presented at the Joint RLG and NPO Preservation Conference: Guidelines for Digital Imaging, held September 28-30, 1998.
Critical Arguements
CA "Cedars is a project that aims to address strategic, methodological and practical issues relating to digital preservation (Day 1998a). A key outcome of the project will be to improve awareness of digital preservation issues, especially within the UK higher education sector. Attempts will be made to identify and disseminate: Strategies for collection management ; Strategies for long-term preservation. These strategies will need to be appropriate to a variety of resources in library collections. The project will also include the development of demonstrators to test the technical and organisational feasibility of the chosen preservation strategies. One strand of this work relates to the identification of preservation metadata and a metadata implementation that can be tested in the demonstrators." ... "The Cedars Access Issues Working Group has produced a preliminary study of preservation metadata and the issues that surround it (Day 1998b). This study describes some digital preservation initiatives and models with relation to the Cedars project and will be used as a basis for the development of a preservation metadata implementation in the project. The remainder of this paper will describe some of the metadata approaches found in these initiatives."
Conclusions
RQ "The Cedars project is interested in helping to develop suitable collection management policies for research libraries." ... "The definition and implementation of preservation metadata systems is going to be an important part of the work of custodial organisations in the digital environment."
SOW
DC "The Cedars (CURL exemplars in digital archives) project is funded by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) of the UK higher education funding councils under Phase III of its Electronic Libraries (eLib) Programme. The project is administered through the Consortium of University Research Libraries (CURL) with lead sites based at the Universities of Cambridge, Leeds and Oxford."
Type
Web Page
Title
Use of Encoded Archival Description (EAD) for Manuscript Collection Finding Aids
Presented in 1999 to the Library's Collection Development & Management Committee, this report outlines support for implementing EAD in delivery of finding aids for library collections over the Web. It describes the limitations of HTML, provides an introduction to SGML, XML, and EAD, outlines the advantages of conversion from HTML to EAD, the conversion process, the proposed outcome, and sources for further information.
Publisher
National Library of Australia
Critical Arguements
CA As use of the World Wide Web has increased, so has the need of users to be able to discover web-based information resources easily and efficiently, and to be able to repeat that discovery in a consistent manner. Using SGML to mark up web-based documents facilitates such resource discovery.
Conclusions
RQ To what extent have the mainstream web browser companies fulfilled their committment to support native viewing of SGML/XML documents?
