Weinberger poses three questions that need to be answered when selecting digital materials for long-term preservation:
• Do we want to preserve this digital object?
• May we (do we have the legal rights to) preserve this digital object?
• Can we (do we have the technical ability to) preserve this digital object?
(Weinberger, 1999).
1111 2 3 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3111 4 5 6 7 8 9 20111 1 211 3 4 5 6 71 8 9 30111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40111 1 2 3 44 45 46 47 48 49 50111
Developing selection frameworks for preserving digital materials 69
Traditional Criteria Applied CEDARS/DPC
Selection Criteria to Selection for Decision Tree Digitizing
Value Evidential Sufficient value to Significant long-term Aesthetic current audience value?
Market Does digitization Associational add value?
Exhibition Informational Physical Threat to object condition Fragility
Resources Management Is infrastructure
available plan? available?
Is cost appropriate?
Use Heavy use Current demand Currently high use
Social Held in Tied to long-term
significance community interests of
esteem? organization
Legal rights Copyright Rights to digitize Legal status Rights to disseminate IP rights
Format issues Can it be digitized Type of material successfully? (can it be digitized
successfully?)
Technical Technical ability to
issues preserve?
Can file format be handled?
Policies Selection policy?
Documentation Sufficient available?
Figure 4.1 Selection Criteria Categorized
We need to expand upon this starting point. As already noted, increasingly non- traditional criteria, such as the legal and intellectual property rights governing a resource, whether we have the technical ability to preserve it, the costs involved in preserving it, and the presence of appropriate documentation and metadata, are becoming central to decision-making in selection of digital materials for preservation.
Many of these factors have been recognized for some time by the audio- visual archiving community and have been incorporated into their selection procedures. The process for determining what to migrate to digital format at the television archives of a German public service broadcaster, the Südwestrund- funk, Stuttgart, is typical. This organization operated a cautious policy on de-selection because their experience indicated that future requirements were not easy to predict. Nonetheless, it would be too expensive to transfer every- thing to digital format, so a more sophisticated prioritization schedule was developed. In addition to criteria based on content and form (documentary, magazine, spot and so on) the ‘archival worthiness’ of the material is deter- mined, based on the cataloguer’s assessment. Also considered are broadcast rights (where these exist only for a limited time, the material is not selected), physical carrier condition (good; at risk because of brand, age, frequent use;
showing signs of deterioration) and status of the copy (is it a copy, a copy where the original still exists, etc). This process is ‘time-consuming, but nevertheless it is to be strongly recommended’ (Lacken, 2001, p.25).
In Phase 1 of its investigations the InterPARES project addressed the ques- tion ‘How do we select electronic records for preservation?’. It determined that records in digital format should be selected for long-term preservation on the basis of ‘continuing value, authenticity, and feasibility of preservation’. The authenticity of records should be established using the InterPARES Benchmark Requirements for Assessing the Authenticity of Electronic Records. The feasi- bility of preservation should take into account ‘current and anticipated capabilities and projected costs’. Appraisal of records in digital form should be carried out as early as possible, and ideally should be ‘built into the design of record-keeping systems’. Assessment of authenticity and feasibility may be carried out later. Appraisal decisions should be monitored regularly to ensure that the information kept about the records is valid: the recommendation is to
‘ensure that changes to records and their context have not negatively affected their identity or integrity nor the ability to preserve them’ (US-InterPARES Project, 2002, pp.8–9).
This InterPARES statement refers to records, which are of diminished value if they not authentic. We can widen this discussion to include other kinds of digital materials as well. The UNESCO Guidelines consider the attributes that contribute to authenticity as ‘the elements that give material its value . . . the selection process should consider what those elements and characteristics are’
(UNESCO, 2003, p.75). These vary according to the kinds of material. For example, for e-mail messages it may be decided that
users of a large collection of electronic mail messages only need to see elements that can be characterised as ‘content information’, such as the name and address of the sender, subject, date and time, recipients, and the message, in a standardised structure with only the most simple of formatting (UNESCO, 2003, p.78).
70 Selection for Preservation – The Critical Decision
For other materials where the structures are much less well-defined, different elements and characteristics will be considered of value.
Earlier in this chapter it was noted that we need to identify the equivalents of content, structure, and context for digital materials that are not records. Can this ‘content, structure, and context’ notion assist us to develop more precise preservation selection criteria for application to digital materials? To test this we might use three examples: videotapes maintained by a government-owned broadcasting company’s library, web sites, and dissertations and theses in digital form. Note that these examples are described here only as a kind of ‘proof of concept’ to suggest that this approach will assist the development of viable selection criteria.
The first example is not strictly of digital material but some of the same prin- ciples apply. For videotapes maintained by a government-owned broadcasting company’s library, the information content is significant, as much material of national heritage significance is produced by this broadcaster. Because the video- tapes exist in a number of formats, technological obsolescence of recording and playback equipment is a major issue. Selection criteria should consider the
‘obsolescence rating’ for each format, such as lower riskfor formats such as VHS, vulnerablefor Digital Betacam (Sony), threatenedfor 1-inch Umatic, and critically endangered for 1-inch SMPTE (Ampex). For this material the structure (record form) becomes a crucial criterion for selection. The context in which these video- tapes were created also becomes important to consider: the broadcasting company has a legal deposit obligation for some material it produces, and for other material it has negotiated rights with intellectual property owners.
For web sites (the second example) we need to document the structure (record form). This will be html, perhaps with Java applets, CGI, Cold Fusion and other related applications or add-ons. There is a need to preserve documentation about software. Some web sites may need to be retained for legal purposes.
For the third example, dissertations and theses in digital form, we need to document the structure (record form), which may be word-processing and/or imaging software. Contextual information to retain could include documenta- tion that explains the reasons why and the conditions under which this material was created. These examples are summarized in Figure 4.2.
1111 2 3 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3111 4 5 6 7 8 9 20111 1 211 3 4 5 6 71 8 9 30111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40111 1 2 3 44 45 46 47 48 49 50111
Developing selection frameworks for preserving digital materials 71
Structure Content Context
(record form) (information) (linkages) Videotapes VHS, Digital Betacam Significant national Legal deposit
(Sony), 1-inch Umatic, heritage content regulations;
1-inch SMPTE (e.g. documentaries) intellectual property
(Ampex) rights of other parties
Web sites Html, Java applets, Significant Legal requirements
etc intellectual content
Digital Word-processing Significant Regulations under theses software, pdf intellectual content which submitted; value
as a record of the university’s activities Figure 4.2 Content, Structure and Context of Some Digital Materials
Selection of materials for preservation is a fluid field, in which many vari- ables are constantly being redefined and more thinking needs to be done. Digital materials add extra complications. Codification of these variables into frame- works that can be applied in practice is being attempted. One attempt is the appraisal toolkit for electronic records of the Public Records Office in the United Kingdom (Public Record Office, 2000).