<figure><img src="image_71.png" /></figure>

PRISCILLA CAPLAN

# NIST Digital Preservation Interoperability Framework

The National Institute of Standards and Technology held a workshop on developing a roadmap for a Digital Preservation Interoperability Framework on March 29-31 on the NIST campus in Gaithersburg, MD. The purpose was to identify U.S. requirements, technologies, and best practices for standardization related to long-term preservation. A second workshop was held on April 21-23, 2010, in Dresden, Germany. Results of the two workshops will inform the efforts of the ISO/IEC JTC1 Study Group on Digital Content Management and Protection (SGDCMP), which was reconstituted in 2009 with a specific focus on digital preservation.

The U.S. workshop, which attracted about 130 registered attendees, was organized into three tracks: content, technology, and standards. Each track occupied a day of the meeting, beginning with a keynote address and ending with a panel discussion. In between, speakers were allotted 30 minute slots to present papers they had previously submitted. The format included time for questions after each talk and as part of the panel presentations, allowing ample opportunity for audience participation.

The whole-conference keynote was delivered by **Chris Greer**, the Assistant Director for Information Technology Research and Development in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Dr. Greer focused on challenges to the preservation of scientific data, including the great diversity in patterns of information use and exchange in different disciplines, the need for data management expertise and infrastructure, the need to incentivize data management planning, and the need for sustainable economic models for preservation and access.

Greer's talk set a good tone for the workshop, which presented a better mix of attendees from scientific and cultural heritage domains than the typical preservation conference. Government agencies were well represented, with speakers from the NSF, OSTI, NASA, USGS, NOAA, and NIH as well as NARA, the Library of Congress, the Smithsonian, and the Government Printing Office. The library domain was represented by the usual suspects presenting on PREMIS, the MetaArchive, DigCCurr, LOCKSS, and DAITSS.

Although all of the presentations were interesting, only a minority concerned either standards or interoperability.

Dr. Walter Warnick from the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) gave a talk entitled *The Interoperability Solution: Federated Search and Good Databases*. Noting that search engines have trouble indexing the deep web where much scientific data resides, he touted the success of Science.gov and WorldWideScience.org, federated search gateways which transform queries into target-specific searches. While it is nice to see federated search actually working, the talk did not address digital preservation directly.

> The workshop presented a better mix of attendees from scientific and cultural heritage domains than the typical preservation conference.

David Minor spoke about a project to develop tools and methods to automate the exchange of data between two approaches to preservation storage: the MetaArchive Cooperative and Chronopolis. The MetaArchive is a Private LOCKSS Network while Chronopolis is a federated data grid

CONTINUED »
HDF

HDF5 is an open source file
format for storing and managing
data, and its associated tools and
applications. The HDF5 technology
suite is used extensively by NASA
and other agencies dealing with
extremely large datasets.

based on iRODS (Integrated Rule-Oriented Data System). The project plans to examine the atomic units in each system's processing (ingest, verification, data transfer, fixity) to identify commonalities and differences and develop an ingest reference model. It will also draft a standard XML representation of common technical metadata that needs to be tracked.

Joseph Pawletko from New York University described TIPR (Towards Interoperable Preservation Repositories), another system-to-system interoperability project. In contrast to the MetaArchive/Chronopolis project, TIPR is oriented towards OAIS-based repositories and assumes that digital provenance and rights information must be maintained across any package transfer. TIPR has defined a common transfer format called the RXP (Repository Exchange Package), based on METS and PREMIS. The RXP may be a candidate for further standardization activity.

Leslie Johnston from the Library of Congress (LC) presented on BagIt, another specification for packaging digital content for transfer. BagIt is a simple format consisting of a bag of content and a simple manifest, and in fact is used by the TIPR project to carry RXPs. LC has developed a number of BagIt tools, including a validation script, a verification script for fixity checking, a parallel retriever script for efficient package transfer, an authoring tool, and others.

Dr. Mike Folk spoke about HDF5, which is an open source file format for storing and managing data, and its associated tools and applications. The HDF5 technology suite is used

extensively by NASA and other agencies dealing with extremely
large datasets. It not only enables the management and
manipulation of this data, but is a good archivable format for
long-term preservation. **Matthew Dougherty**, a researcher at
the National Center for Macromolecular Imaging, spoke about
the proliferation of proprietary file formats in his field. High
resolution electron microscopy has ten formats, while optical
x-ray utilizes at least 100 formats. He saw HDF5 as the only way
to represent these highly complex datasets in a usable, elegant,
and consistent way.

A fascinating talk by **Peter Bajcsy** at NCSA concerned a different kind of interoperability: a framework for understanding file format conversions, so that we can make files both backward and forward compatible when we have no idea what formats will be used in the future. NCSA has developed a software conversion registry and software that can convert from format A to format X regardless of how many hops (intermediate formats) in the path. They are also researching ways to assess how much information has been lost in the conversion.

The Dresden workshop, which this writer did not attend,
had a different set of speakers from Europe, Japan, and New
Zealand, and an equally interesting program.

| CR |

doi: 10.3789/isqv22n2.2010.11

PRISCILLA CAPLAN <pcaplan@ufl.edu> is Assistant Director for Digital Library Services, Florida Center for Library Automation. Among other responsibilities, she directs the Florida Digital Archive, a long-term preservation repository using the DAITSS open source repository applications, and represents FCLA on the Towards Interoperable Preservation Repositories (TIPR) project. Priscilla is the Guest Content Editor for this special preservation-themed issue of ISQ.

Digital Preservation Interoperability Framework workshops

ddp.nist.gov/symposium/home.php

BagIt

wiki.ucop.edu/display/Curation/BagIt

Chronopolis

chronopolis.sdsc.edu/

HDF5

www.hdfgroup.org/HDF5/

MetaArchive Cooperative

www.metaarchive.org/

TIPR: Towards Interoperable Preservation Repositories

wiki.fcla.edu:8000/TIPR

<figure><img src="image_72.png" /></figure>

RELEVANT
LINKS
<figure><img src="image_73.png" /><figcaption>Melissa
Goertzen</figcaption></figure>

[CONFERENCE REPORT]

MELISSA GOERTZEN

<figure><img src="image_74.png" /></figure>

# What It Takes to Make It Last: E-Resources Preservation: A NISO Webinar

Since pen has been put to paper, memory institutions have been tasked with the responsibility of preserving cultural and intellectual heritage. For centuries, experts have created storage environments that protect tangible materials from decay, while at the same time allowing visitors to access information. Now, thirty years into the digital revolution, it has become clear that preservation policies must expand to include digital content if information is to remain available for future generations. Factors such as media obsolescence, degradation, and server failures have left virtual content in a vulnerable position, and sustainable platforms of preservation must be utilized to prevent information from vanishing without a trace as technology trends shift.

In the past, the preservation of physical collections fell on the shoulders of institutions. It is becoming increasingly apparent that due to the extensive and interconnected nature of the digital universe, electronic preservation efforts must be addressed on a communal instead of institutional level. As a result, experts are engaging in collaborative projects and public discussions to address sustainability challenges presented by digital content. On February 10, 2010, NISO hosted a webinar entitled *What it Takes to Make it Last: E-Resources Preservation*, which addressed topics relating to digital memory and preservation repositories at academic institutions. Speakers included **Priscilla Caplan**, Assistant Director for Digital Library Services at the Florida Center for Library Automation, and **Jeremy York**, Assistant Librarian at the University of Michigan Library. Each presentation provided examples of preservation standards and policies that can be implemented by universities to ensure digital content will remain accessible for years to come. The session was both informative and interesting, and provided participants with ideas regarding how to approach issues of content sustainability.

<figure><img src="image_75.png" /></figure>

The webinar began by challenging some preconceived notions regarding preservation. At times, it seems that preservation efforts come down to storing duplicate copies of digital content on external hard drives or DVDs, essentially creating the equivalent of electronic photocopies. As **Priscilla Caplan** explained, content availability is only one piece of the puzzle. In order for archival structures to be successful, they

The session was both informative and interesting, and provided participants with ideas regarding how to approach issues of content sustainability.

must also guarantee usability. This includes ensuring that the quality is not altered, the files are displayable, and that each object remains what it proposes to be. In other words, preservation is not simply about capturing snapshots of the original. It is about ensuring that information remains available in its authentic form for future generations.

Because the preservation of electronic content is a complex issue, it can be challenging to know where to begin. For example, what procedures or policies do institutions need to consider to ensure that digital output is ready to be ingested into communal preservation repositories? Caplan explained that standardization is the key, and that metadata and object files can be prepared for long-term preservation by following established guidelines and framework models. One such source is the *Open Archival Information System (OAIS) Reference Model*, which creates a basis for standardization by providing a common vocabulary that can be used to describe and compare

CONTINUED»
<figure><img src="image_76.png" /></figure>

Ten years from now will it be possible to access and edit the many PDF files that have been burned onto DVDs for archival purposes? Because it is impossible to anticipate how technology will evolve over the next several years, Caplan suggested the use of sustainable formats wherever possible.

archives. Through this framework, institutions can discuss how preservation policies and procedures may change over time as technology evolves, and what information is needed to ensure the future accessibility of materials within a designated community of users.

In addition to guidance found through archival reference models, institutions can consult checklists or request audits to ensure they have established trustworthy repositories. Processes such as the Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification (TRAC) or the Digital Repository Audit Method Based on Risk Assessment (DRAMBORA) can assess the reliability and readiness of organizations to take on the responsibilities of long-term preservation. Components that are evaluated include organizational infrastructure, technical infrastructure, digital object management, documentation, and transparency, just to name a few. Such checklists can be of great value, as they can alert system administrators to issues that may put content at risk if left unchecked, such as media obsolescence and degradation.

While it is necessary to back up information using media devices, it is vital to ensure that information stored today will be accessible tomorrow. For example, ten years from now will it be possible to access and edit the many PDF files that have been burned onto DVDs for archival purposes? Because it is impossible to anticipate how technology will evolve over the next several years, Caplan suggested the use of sustainable formats wherever possible. For example, institutions can opt to use PDF/A formats instead of PDF files. The difference between these formats is that the former produces self-contained files that embed information such as font, color, and preservation metadata into the document code. As a result, experts suggest that PDF/A files will maintain their integrity and allow for authentic reproductions to be created for years to come.

► Caplan began her second presentation on the topic of preservation metadata, by introducing the *PREMIS Data Dictionary*. She explained that PREMIS supports preservation metadata by requiring information relating to content viability, renderability, fixity, and authenticity. This ensures that material remains readable and usable, and that each source is verifiable and without alteration. Components required by PREMIS include characteristics of administrative, technical, and structural metadata, and consideration is given to maintaining relationships that exist between objects and records stored in repositories. As Caplan explained, the goal of preservation metadata is to include all information that a repository requires to ensure long-term sustainability. To this end, PREMIS is designed to define required information, create and manage collection records, and prepare metadata for entry and use in automated workflows. It supports the creation of core metadata, which in turn provides repositories with all information required to support long-term preservation efforts and work towards content sustainability.

When developing preservation metadata and preparing material for use in repositories, Caplan provided several tips that should be kept in mind. First of all, institutions should standardize metadata using data dictionaries in order to ensure that all necessary information required for preservation is in place. It is also important to test standardized metadata records to guarantee the success of imports and exports. Finally, all information about creation applications and environments should be recorded and embedded into the document code if at all possible. When these elements are present, institutions are ready to take on the responsibility of long-term content preservation.

Following Caplan's presentations, **Jeremy York** spoke about his involvement with the HathiTrust Digital Library project. His presentation provided webinar participants with
an excellent example of how collaboration, preservation audits, and the creation of preservation metadata work together to create stable and sustainable preservation repositories. The HathiTrust Digital Library was launched by the University of Michigan in 2008, and has since grown to include 4.6 million volumes. The initial focus of the project was on digitized book and journal content, but has expanded to include born digital content as well. The initiative began as a collaboration between thirteen universities on the University of California system and the Committee on Institutional Cooperation. In practice, HathiTrust was set up to provide a stable repository in which institutions could contribute digital content for long-term preservation. The central goal of the partnership was to preserve human knowledge for the common good, and provide continuous access to research communities.

As York explained, one of the strengths of HathiTrust is that it relies on a combination of expert staff and input from preservation communities to ensure content remains available for future generations. Partners are provided with the opportunity to communicate with project managers, information technologists, and copyright officers who can provide suitable information regarding servers, content migration, and storage. In addition, the repository is built around standardized procedures outlined in the *OAIS Reference Model*, and documents all preservation actions in accordance with standards outlined by the *PREMIS Data Dictionary*. Recently, HathiTrust also underwent several system audits to ensure the repository is in a position to take on the responsibilities of long-term preservation. For example, the project was reviewed by the Digital Curation Center and Digital Preservation Europe using standards outlined by DRAMBORA. The working elements of collaboration, standardization, and the use of repository audits has allowed HathiTrust to guarantee content sustainability and provide valuable information to an international community of researchers.

There are several ways in which HathiTrust strives to maintain the authenticity, integrity, and usability of its contents. First of all, the repository is structured to preserve the layout and general appearance of content deposited in the repository. It focuses on the development of preservation metadata, and records information pertaining to the creation of content deposited in the digital library. Also, only sustainable formats are ingested into the repository. These include TIFF, JPEG or JPEG2000 files, all of which can be easily migrated over time. Data integrity is maintained through means such as checksum validation. Finally, to guarantee efficient storage of files and protection against system failures, HathiTrust has set up two clustered storage systems located in separate geographic locations. Also, a third encrypted backup is stored in a facility at Ann Arbor. The use of preservation metadata, sustainable file formats, and off-site servers are only several of the ways the HathiTrust Digital Library works with partners to ensure that digital content is highly accessible to the research community, and will remain available for years to come.

The information provided by both Priscilla Caplan and Jeremy York served to provide excellent overviews of the challenges and rewards of digital preservation. Webinar participants were provided with many useful suggestions and resources that can be implemented when designing digital collections or building preservation repositories. Through the efforts of organization such as PREMIS and the HathiTrust Digital Library, memory institutions have great hope of providing continuous access to authentic digital content for generations to come. | CR | doi: 10.3789/isqv22n2.2010.12

MELISSA GOERTZEN <mjgoertz@ucalgary.ca> is Project Manager in the Digitization Unit, Libraries and Cultural Resources, at the University of Calgary.

**NISO E-Resources Preservation Webinar Slides**
www.niso.org/news/events/2010/preservation

**Digital Curation Centre, Digital Repository Audit Method Based On Risk Assessment (DRAMBORA).**
www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/tools-and-applications/drambora

**Document management - Electronic document file format for long-term preservation - Part 1: Use of PDF 1.4 (PDF/A-1), ISO 19005-1:2005**
www.iso.org/iso/iso catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=38920

**HathiTrust Digital Repository**
www.hathitrust.org

**PREMIS Data Dictionary for Preservation Metadata**
www.loc.gov/standards/premis/

**Space data and information transfer systems - Open archival information system Reference model, ISO 14721:2003**
www.iso.org/iso/iso catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=24683

**Trustworthy Repositories Audit and Certification (TRAC) criteria and checklist, Chicago: Center for Research Libraries; Dublin, Ohio: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc., 2007.**
www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics-assessing-and-certifying

<figure><img src="image_77.png" /></figure>

RELEVANT
LINKS
<figure><img src="image_78.png" /></figure>

Valerie
Ryder

VALERIE RYDER

Electronic Resources & Libraries
2010 Conference

The 5th Electronic Resources & Libraries (ER&L) Conference was held February 1-3, 2010, in Austin, TX. This conference is planned by academic librarians to discuss issues concerning electronic resources and to share best practices.

The 350 attendees from 40 states and six countries were primarily from the academic library community (77%) with 16% representing the information industry and the remainder from libraries in government agencies, institutions, and corporations. Registration is capped to maintain the collegial atmosphere of the conference and to facilitate networking and discussion. Vendors from the information content and services industry provide some funding for the conference to defray expenses and keep the registration fee as low as possible, compared with other conferences. The only sales opportunity is the two-hour Sponsors' Reception, hosted by the vendors, on Monday evening.

Prevalent themes of this year's conference were:

» ways of dealing with library budget reductions
(a relatively new experience for academic librarians),

» using electronic resources usage statistics to evaluate
the collections and determine cancellations,

» creation and maintenance of digital collections with local
content (such as historical documents, maps, artifacts,
and art objects),

» standards for data and system interfaces, and

» technology trends such as electronic books (e-books), mobile access devices, web-scale discovery, and federated search.

The overwhelmingly favorite topic on attendees' minds from
the Thought Cloud produced on the ER&L website prior to
the conference was Usage Metrics. Workflow and E-books tied
for second place in the myriad of issues that attendees wanted
to discuss.

Pre-conference seminars on January 31 covered how
to successfully market electronic resources, techniques for
processing, storing, and viewing usage data and explored
current dilemmas in information ethics.

The keynote speaker, University of Texas School of
Information professor **Lance Hayden**, set the tone for the
conference by challenging attendees' thinking about security
and privacy as related to digital information in the wild world
of the Internet.

The 45 sessions presented over two and a half days were
organized into ten tracks:

1. Electronic Resource Management (ERM) Systems

2 Managing Electronic Resources

3 Standards

4 E-books

5 Statistics & Assessment

6 ER Delivery & Promotion

7 Scholarly Communication

8 Collaboration

9 Emerging & Future Technologies

10 Collection Development

Most of the presentations were case studies discussing how
these issues are addressed at the presenters' institutions and
offering best practices and lessons learned.

Academic librarians are struggling with the significant
reductions in their subscriptions budgets that have occurred
each year since 2007. Many libraries subscribe to full-text
journal databases that duplicate coverage with their print
journal collections so they are paying for the same journal
title multiple times, sometimes with different time period
coverage and embargos. Librarians are struggling with how to
identify and eliminate the overlaps to reduce their subscription
spending without reducing their content scope. **Diane Carroll**
of Washington State University, **Tim Jewell** of the University
of Washington, and **Nina Bakkalbasi** of Yale University Library
<figure><img src="image_79.png" /></figure>

each presented their data-intensive work processes for assessing the journal collections at their universities. **Gayle Baker** and **Ken Wise** of the University of Tennessee presented how they calculate Return on Investment (ROI) for their journal collections as part of justifying their budget levels and proving value to their institutions.

Many of the libraries are embracing the e-book as another delivery mechanism for content whether the media is a web-based e-book, a digital book delivered through the Internet, a digital book delivered to a mobile device (e-book reader or other device), or a web-based Major Reference Work. Libraries are subscribing to e-book collections as well as individual book titles. They are challenged by the selection and evaluation process concerning which media and platform to choose as well as accommodating these media into their ordering and cataloging processes. **Lee Hisle** of Connecticut College, **Ellen Safley** of the University of Texas at Dallas, and **Nancy Gibbs** of Duke University shared their experiences with patron-driven selection of e-books where students and faculty members determine which e-books are added to the library collection through their usage of specific e-books from collections made available in the library's online public access catalog. **Dani Roach** and **Carolyn DeLuca** of the University of St. Thomas delivered humorous but realistic insights on the quandary that many e-books have the characteristics of serials and databases as well as print books. Their interactive dialogue with attendees illustrated how librarians are rethinking and revising their technical work processes to handle e-books as hybrids. During session question and answer periods as well as networking conversations, some librarians expressed their preferences for buying individual e-books by title rather than collections of e-books. They commented that they lost the ability to select e-journals by title when they converted to the e-journal bundles and they do not want to lose that selectivity when they move to

> Many of the libraries are embracing the e-book as another delivery mechanism for content whether the media is a web-based e-book, a digital book delivered through the Internet, a digital book delivered to a mobile device (e-book reader or other device), or a web-based Major Reference Work.

e-books from print books. The lament of "life was easier in the print media for books" was expressed by more than a few librarians.

A common theme throughout the conference was that librarians want systems to handle all their electronic resources from selection and procurement to user access and delivery. They want new systems, such as electronic resource management systems (ERMs), to integrate well with their existing systems, such as their integrated library system (ILS) or online public access catalog (OPAC). In many cases, the academic librarians have tested the ERMs from many vendors but found them lacking desired features or incompatible with their existing work processes, so they have developed their own ERM system or particular modules. Those libraries that have implemented vendor ERM systems have had to modify their work processes to conform to the system's requirements. Excellent case studies were presented by **Abigail Bordeaux** of

CONTINUED »
<figure><img src="image_80.png" /></figure>

Web-scale discovery engines have to normalize metadata harvested from many sources in order for search to work well. Vendor web-scale discovery engines are still being improved and may not have normalized metadata for all sources that a library wants to search.

Harvard University as well as **Benjamin Heet** and **Robin Malott** of University of Notre Dame.

The standards scene for ERM systems is still in flux. **Tim Jewell** of the University of Washington gave a good review of the NISO ERM Working Group's fast track efforts to perform a “gap analysis” of the remaining management and data standards issues. Original standards such as Electronic Resource Management Initiative (ERMI) were not standards but really “pre-standards.” Vendors found it hard to develop systems using these standards. Following the analysis, the working group will make recommendations regarding the future of the ERMI data dictionary and identify gaps in interoperability and best practices to inform future work.

Another issue that was discussed frequently was the proliferation of problems with the quality of data passed from content providers to link resolvers, even those adhering to the OpenURL standard. Cornell University's **Adam Chandler** presented results of a study of several link resolvers and the data being passed from content providers. The success of an OpenURL link resolver finding the right article depends upon which data elements are passed from the content provider. A two-year NISO project was approved in December 2009 to investigate the feasibility of creating industry-wide transparent and scalable metrics for evaluating and comparing the quality of OpenURL implementations across content providers.

Interest continues in web-scale discovery engines as an improvement over federated search. **George Boston** of Western Michigan University explored the advantages and challenges of each approach to providing the user with a

simple, easy, and fast search solution that unifies all of the resources in a library. Web-scale discovery engines have to normalize metadata harvested from many sources in order for search to work well. Vendor web-scale discovery engines are still being improved and may not have normalized metadata for all sources that a library wants to search. This is similar to the lag in developing the search maps for each source that federated search engines needed to crawl when they were first marketed.

**Jamene Brooks-Kieffer** of Kansas State University Libraries challenged attendees to envision the future with new services and evolving standards as the journal article becomes the primary entity of scholarship. Technology solutions will expedite the discovery to delivery process for users but mask the librarian's role in ensuring seamless integration and provide business model challenges to information industry players who have a stake in the current workflow.

Closing session panelists provided the transition to next year's ER&L by discussing tools and technologies for the future. **Andrew Nagy** of Serials Solutions focused on Software as a Service (SaaS) and cloud computing, library resources discovery services, and next generation catalogs. **Ross Singer** of Talis illustrated the concept of linked data by showing how difficult it is for users to see how the library's collection of data is connected to the vast world of external data.

Once again the ER&L Conference provided a venue to share knowledge and experiences with electronic resources, learn of new developments and potential solutions, and debate challenging ideas in an open dialogue between the library community and information industry partners.

**VALERIE RYDER** <vryder@wolper.com> is Director of Information Strategy at Wolper Subscription Services in Easton, PA.

**Electronic Resources & Libraries 2010 website**

www.electroniclibrarian.org/erlwiki/ER%26L

**Electronic Resources & Libraries 2010 presentation materials**

www.electroniclibrarian.org/erlwiki/Program#Presentations Listed_by_Track

**NISO ERM Data Standards & Best Practices Review**

www.niso.org/workrooms/ermreview

**NISO Working Group on OpenURL Quality Metrics**

www.niso.org/workrooms/openurlquality

<figure><img src="image_81.png" /></figure>

RELEVANT
LINKS
NW

[NOTEWORTHY]

<figure><img src="image_82.png" /></figure>

Of the approaches discussed, the guide particularly recommends the use of the LOCKSS software to create Private LOCKSS Networks (PLNs), a model which the MetaArchive Cooperative has used for over six years for their own shared infrastructure.

# Distributed Digital Preservation Guide from the MetaArchive Cooperative

Touted as being the first in a series of preservation publications, *A Guide to Distributed Digital Preservation*, produced by the MetaArchive Cooperative, contains a collection of articles by Cooperative members on the still-emerging field of using digital replication and distribution for preservation.

Of the approaches discussed, the guide particularly recommends the use of the LOCKSS software to create Private LOCKSS Networks (PLNs), a model which the MetaArchive Cooperative has used for over six years for their own shared infrastructure. The PLN model is used as the underlying framework and case example for the Guide's discussions of architecture; technical considerations; organizational considerations; content selection, preparation, and management; content ingest, monitoring, and recovery;

cache and network administration; and copyright practices—although much of the content is considered extensible to other distributed digital preservation solutions as well.

In providing the guide, the authors hope to forestall a trend towards outsourcing of digital collection management. “The central assertion of the MetaArchive Cooperative... is that cultural memory organizations can and should take responsibility for managing their digital collections, and that such institutions can realize many advantages in collaborative long term preservation and access strategies.” A distributed strategy with institutional collaboration and investment supported by a robust technical infrastructure is the proposed alternative. ■

<figure><img src="image_83.png" /></figure>

Download the guide at: www.metaarchive.org/GDDP
## Planets Survey Gauges Organizational Readiness for Digital Preservation

The Preservation and Long-Term Access Though Networked Services (Planets) Project has issued a white paper summarizing a market survey of over two hundred organizations, mainly European archives and libraries, investigating their digital preservation activities and needs.

**Findings of the survey included:**

» The volume of digital content that organizations expect to archive will increase 25-fold over the next ten years. By 2019, 70% of survey respondents expect to hold over 100TB of content.

» Within a decade, over 70% will need to preserve video, audio, databases, websites, and e-mail in addition to the current needs for documents and images.

» The three most important capabilities of a digital preservation system were:

maintaining the authenticity, reliability, and integrity of records; checking that records have not been damaged; and planning the preservation of content to deal with technical obsolescence.

» Open-source and proprietary software are used equally by respondents, and often combined in the same solution.

» Respondents were much less interested in emulation than in migration as a preservation solution for technology obsolescence.

» Only 27% think that they have complete control over the file formats that they will accept and store in their digital archives.

» Compliance with metadata standards is regarded as fairly important, but there is less agreement on which standards. Dublin Core was the most popular (used by 51% of respondents), followed by MARC (31%) and ISAD(G) (28%).

» Organizations are only starting to commit to funding digital preservation; just 47% have allocated a budget to it.

» There is evidence that digital preservation is emerging as a profession in its own right; where previously the work was carried out by IT and preservation or curation staff, now it is starting to be carried out by specialists.

The white paper concludes with a summary of needed next steps including the importance of having a digital preservation policy and the need for more and better tools to automate the preservation process. ■

<figure><img src="image_84.png" /></figure>

The Planets white paper and a separate survey analysis report are available from: www.planets-project.eu/publications/

## Report on Sustainable Economics for Long Term Preservation

For its final report, The Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access has taken an economic perspective on all the resources—human, technical, and financial—that are needed to ensure that digital assets will be available for future use. *Sustainable Economics for a Digital Planet* identifies three requirements:

1. articulate a compelling value proposition;

2. provide clear incentives to preserve in the public interest;

3. define roles and responsibilities among stakeholders to ensure an ongoing and efficient flow of resources to preservation throughout the digital lifecycle.

National and international agencies, funders, and sponsors of data creation, stakeholder organizations, and individuals are all called upon to take particular actions to ensure preservation and access.

Four domains—scholarly discourse, research data, commercially owned cultural content, and collectively created web content—were analyzed for their sustainability risks and domain-specific recommendations were made. For example, in the domain of scholarly discourse, the Task Force recommended that “publishers reserving the right to preserve should partner with third-party archives or libraries to ensure long-term preservation.” For collectively produced web content, the Task Force suggests that “creators, contributors, and host sites could lower barriers to third-party archiving by using a default license to grant nonexclusive rights for archiving.”

The Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access was created in late 2007 with funding from the National Science Foundation and The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, in partnership with the Library of Congress, the Joint Information Systems Committee of the United Kingdom, the Council on Library and Information Resources, and the National Archives and Records Administration. ■

<figure><img src="image_85.png" /></figure>

All of the Task Force's publications, including *Sustainable Economics for a Digital Planet*, are available for free download from: brtf.sdsc.edu/publications.html
# Keeping Research Data Safe

Building on the Phase 1 report's cost model for the long-term preservation of research data, the Keeping Research Data Safe (KRDS) project has just published their Phase 2 report, which reports the results of testing and validating that cost model. Survey cost data was received on 13 collections and the cost information from four organizations—Archeology Data Service, National Digital Archive of Datasets, UK Data Archive, and University of Oxford—were analyzed in depth and presented in case studies. A benefits framework was also developed and illustrated with case studies from the National Crystallography Service at Southampton University and the UK Data Archive at the University of Essex.

Among the report's conclusions were:

* The costs of acquisition/ingest and access are far greater than the costs of the archiving activities. Thus, it is likely that the largest potential cost benefits will come from the development of tools that support the ingest and access activities.

* Once core fixed costs are in place (largely staff resources), increasing levels of economies of scale can be demonstrated as content is added.

* The documentation of the dataset can be as beneficial to archive as the data itself. (In one example, the documentation was downloaded 10 times more often than the actual dataset.)

* The OAIS reference model fits better with preservation services focused on data archives and institutional repositories. It is less ideal for focusing on "near-term preservation and curation work from a researcher perspective."

* The benefits taxonomy has great potential for further development and implementation. [Ed. Note: While the study focused on datasets, the benefits taxonomy could be easily transferable to other types of preservation collections and activities.]

The KRDS2 study was funded by JISC with support from OCLC Research and the UK Data Archive. ■

The full report can be downloaded from the KRDS2 webpage: www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2010/keepingresearchdatasafe2.aspx

# JHOVE2 Beta Released

A new beta version of JHOVE2, the open-source Java framework for format-aware characterization of digital objects, has been released to the public. Characterization not only provides information about an object but can also function as a surrogate, which is especially useful in preservation environments. JHOVE2 uses the processes of identification, validation, feature extraction, and assessment to derive the characterization.

JHOVE2 is being designed as a next-generation improvement to the original JHOVE software, based on over four years of extensive use. While the original JHOVE assumed that one object was equivalent to one file and one format, JHOVE2 supports a single object having multiple files and formats. The redesigned architecture also configures the modules so they can be iteratively applied to each object. Among the other improvements are a plug-in interface, de-coupling the identification and validation, performance enhancements, and better error reporting.

This beta release has been provided to give interested users an early look at the new JHOVE2 architecture and APIs. While the processing modules are fully functional, there is limited format support at this time. Additional format modules will be added as they are completed.

The JHOVE2 project is a collaborative undertaking of the California Digital Library, Portico, and Stanford University, with funding from the Library of Congress as part of its National Digital Information Infrastructure Preservation Program. ■

For further information and to download the beta release, visit the JHOVE2 website: https://confluence.ucop.edu/display/JHOVE2Info/

# Codecs Primer for Archives

AudioVisual Preservation Solutions has published *A Primer on Codecs for Moving Image and Sound Archives: 10 Recommendations for Codec Selection and Management* by Chris Lacinak. In addition to providing introductory material on what encoding and compression are and how they work, the paper emphasizes that the choice of these schemes can impact the ability to preserve the digital object.

Since moving images and sound generally require a codec for the decoding process, the selection process is critical, whether dealing with born digital content, reformatting older content, or converting analog materials. Ten recommended approaches are explained: adoption, disclosure, transparency, external dependencies, documentation and metadata, pre-planning, maintenance, obsolescence monitoring, maintenance of the original, and avoidance of unnecessary transcoding or re-encoding.

There is no single "right" codec; each archive needs to make the decision as part of an overall preservation strategy. ■

The Codecs Primer can be downloaded from: www.avpreserve.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/AVPS_Codec_Primer.pdf
<figure><img src="image_86.png" /></figure>

## In Development or Revision

Listed below are the NISO Working Groups that are currently developing new or revised standards, recommended practices, or reports. Refer to the NISO website (www.niso.org/workrooms/) and Newsline (www.niso.org/publications/newline/) for updates on the Working Group activities.

<table><thead><tr><td>WORKING GROUP</td><td>STATUS</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Cost of Resource Exchange (CORE)<br/>Co-chairs: Ed Riding, Ted Koppel</td><td>Z39.95-200x, Cost of Resource Exchange (CORE) Protocol<br/>Draft Standard for Trial Use (DSFTU)</td></tr><tr><td>DAISY/NISO Standard Advisory Committee<br/>Chair: George Kerscher</td><td>Z39.86-201x, Specifications for the Digital Talking Book<br/>Standard revision in development.</td></tr><tr><td>E-Journal Presentation &amp; Identification<br/>Co-chairs: Cindy Hepfer, TBA</td><td>Working group roster formation underway.</td></tr><tr><td>ERM Data Standards &amp; Best Practices Review<br/>Co-chairs: Ivy Anderson, Tim Jewell</td><td>Technical Report in development.</td></tr><tr><td>Institutional Identifiers (I²)<br/>Co-chairs: Grace Agnew, Oliver Pesch</td><td>Z39.94-201x, Institutional Identifiers<br/>Standard in development.</td></tr><tr><td>IOTA: Improving OpenURLs Through Analytics<br/>(formerly OpenURL Quality Metrics)<br/>Chair: Adam Chandler</td><td>Technical Report in development.</td></tr><tr><td>Knowledge Base and Related Tools<br/>(KBART) Phase II<br/>Joint project with UKSG<br/>Co-chairs: Andreas Biedenbach, Sarah Pearson</td><td>NISO RP-9-2010, KBART: Knowledge Bases and Related Tools<br/>Issued January 2010. Phase II Recommended Practice development work<br/>now underway.</td></tr><tr><td>Physical Delivery of Library Materials<br/>Co-chairs: Valerie Horton, Diana Sachs-Silveira</td><td>Recommended Practice in development.</td></tr><tr><td>RFID for Library Applications Revision<br/>Co-chairs: Vinod Chachra, Paul Sevcik</td><td>RP-6-201x, RFID in U.S. Libraries<br/>Revision in development.</td></tr><tr><td>Single Sign-on (SSO) Authentication<br/>Co-chairs: Steve Carmody, Harry Kaplanian</td><td>Recommended Practice in development.</td></tr><tr><td>Standardized Markup for Journal Articles<br/>Co-chairs: Jeff Beck, B. Tommie Usdin</td><td>Z39.96-201x, Standardized Markup for Journal Articles<br/>Standard in development.</td></tr><tr><td>Supplemental Journal Article Materials<br/>Co-chairs Business Working Group: Linda Beebe,<br/>Marie McVeigh<br/>Co-chairs, Technical Working Group: Dave<br/>Martinsen, Alexander (Sasha) Schwarzman</td><td>Working group roster formation underway.</td></tr></tbody></table>
# 2010 Library Assessment Conference

## Building Effective, Sustainable, Practical Assessment

<figure><img src="image_87.png" /></figure>

Baltimore, Maryland | October 25-27, 2010

Register Now!

<table><thead><tr><td>Keynote Themes</td><td>Speakers</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Library Service Quality</td><td>Fred Heath, University of Texas</td></tr><tr><td>Performance Measures and Balanced Scorecard</td><td>Joe Matthews, San Jose State University</td></tr><tr><td>Assessment of Library Spaces</td><td>Danuta Nitecki, Drexel University</td></tr><tr><td>Information Literacy</td><td>Megan Oakleaf, Syracuse University</td></tr><tr><td>Value and Impact</td><td>Stephen Town, The University of York, UK</td></tr></tbody></table>

The conference goal is to support and nurture the library assessment community through a mix of invited speakers, contributed papers and posters, workshops, and engaging discussion.

Join our ongoing discussion on library assessment issues, visit the library assessment blog or subscribe to arl-assess@arl.org.

www.libraryassessment.org
<figure><img src="image_88.png" /></figure>

Providing Future Access to Digital Content
Requires a Preservation Solution Today

Ensuring future generations can access today's digitally born and digitized information requires a digital preservation solution. Ex Libris Rosetta is a complete, turn-key, enterprise-level digital preservation solution for long-term preservation and management of electronic records of enduring value. As devices like the one pictured above continue evolving, Ex Libris Rosetta will preserve and provide access to your digital collections.