#  Introduction

Deliverable 13.3 “Data management planning (DMP) for long-term preservation”
is described in the DOW as follows: “ _The report and corresponding workshop
is for archives that wish to develop knowledge and capabilities in regard to
the preservation of digital resources based on the EHRI data management
policies. It will focus on data management planning, preservation policy, and
access policy. It will be delivered in coordination with WP4”_ .

This deliverable reports on the activities carried out in relation to Task
13.2 (Secure Longterm Access Infrastructure for the Preservation of Holocaust
Research Objects). It includes details on the workshop that was held on 31
July and 1 August 2017 in The Hague. The outcomes of the workshop are included
in _Chapter 3_ .

The data and information assets of archives consist of a wide range of
different types of digital objects. Examples are databases, text-files,
websites, social media collections, digital images and multimedia files. These
objects can both be digital surrogates of analogue originals (e.g. digitized
photographs) or “digital born” (e.g. documentation of archival collections or
digital recorded oral histories).

In a practical sense long-term preservation of data and information assets is
related to questions like:

  * What are the features of durable digital objects? 

    1. How to avoid file format obsolescence? 

  
  

  

○ How to be sure that future users can use digital objects in a correct way?

○ How to be sure that digital objects remain authentic ● What kind of digital
repository is required?

○ How to assess the quality of a digital repository?

○ How to implement a “Trusted Digital Repository”?

  * What kind of services are required to provide long-term access to digital objects? 

    1. How to protect data objects? 

  
  

  

○ How to share data objects?

○ How to archive data objects?

The aim of the activities carried out is to help to answer these kind of
questions, taking into consideration the specific characteristics and
requirements of the archives within the EHRI consortium. Within the consortium
the number and variety of digital Holocaust objects fluctuates significantly,
as well as the expertise and resources available to manage the digital assets.

#  Context and coherence

Task 13.2 “Secure Long-term Access Infrastructure for the Preservation of
Holocaust Research Objects” is related to three deliverables:

  * D13.3 Data management planning for long-term preservation 

  

  * D13.4 Trusted Digital Repository workshop 

  

  * D13.2 Long-term access infrastructure for preserving Holocaust research objects 

  

Data management refers to the development, execution and supervision of
(research) plans, policies, programs and practices that control, protect,
deliver and enhance the value of data and information assets.

Data should be archived in a repository that complies to international
standards and guidelines of trustworthiness: a certified ‘Trusted Digital
Repository’.

Thus, the mission of the task (13.2) and deliverables (13.2, 13.3 and 13.4)
can be characterized as: “Preserving digital Holocaust evidence for the
future”.

The outcomes of both activities on “data management planning” (D13.3) and on
“Trusted Digital Repositories” (D13.4) are input sources for the “Long-term
Access Infrastructure for Preserving Holocaust Research Objects” (D13.2). The
three deliverables are the outcome of the activities carried out in Task 13.2
“Secure Long-Term Access Infrastructure for the Preservation of Holocaust
Research Objects”. This secure long-term access infrastructure will consist of
a set of guidelines, principles and services that enable organisations to
provide durable access to digital Holocaust resources.

**Figure 1** : EHRI project Deliverables in relation to Task 13.2, “Secure
Long-term Infrastructure for the Preservation of Holocaust Research Objects”.

##  Target audience

Data management planning, trustworthy digital archiving and issues relevant to
realise a long-term access infrastructure is obviously relevant for archives
in general, and not specific for archives that curate Holocaust research
objects. What is specific though for Holocaust archival institutes is the
subject or theme of the archival records, photographs, documentation and other
objects they curate that require specific procedures (e.g. in the field
privacy protection).

The activities in this task and its current deliverables are targeted at
representatives of archives within the EHRI consortium who wish to develop and
extend knowledge and capabilities in regard to the management and long-term
preservation of digital resources. Ideally, representatives of archives are
involved in managing digital data objects or in formulating an appropriate
strategy, such as policy makers.

Archives curating Holocaust objects (both inside and outside the EHRI
consortium) have a couple of specific characteristics, such as:

  1. _Heterogeneous level of IT-savviness_ . 

  

  

The EHRI consortium contains 21 partners that curate documentation and/or
archival material on the Holocaust, both in digital and/or analogue form. The
level of sophistication concerning the application of information technology
to curate digital assets ranges from basic to advanced. This determines to
what extent an archive might be able to contribute to the workshop or learn
from its results. Two groups of archives within the EHRI consortium are
distinguished (1) “IT-Savvy” archives that have a policy on data management /
long-term archiving (or intent to define a policy) and (2) archives that do
not yet have a data management / long-term archiving policy. A representation
of the first group will be actively involved in this task (to discuss data
management planning issues).

  2. _A lot of the curated archival material contains personal data._

  

  

This brings data management issues such as “privacy protection” and “user
authorisation and authentication” to the forefront.

  3. _Analogue archival material is very vulnerable._

  

  

The majority of the archival material originates from the period of the Second
World War and the paper quality of this material is low. Digitization can be
used to preserve the vulnerable originals. Issues like preservation imaging
and long-term access to the images will influence data management policies
applied by the archive.

  4. _The archive collection can contain copies of originals curated by other archives._ Also specific for collection holding institutes curating Holocaust records is that their collections can contain copies of records. This can include copies of original archive sources, both in analogue (e.g. photocopy) and digital (e.g. digital images) format as well as copies of archival finding aids. This “copy-original” issue has specific implications for data management. The original and the copy, for instance, can be described in different ways and do often not have the same level of detail of description. 

  

  

##  Strategy to achieve the goals of the task

The strategy chosen to ultimately arrive at a roadmap for a long-term access
infrastructure for preserving Holocaust Research Objects (D13.2) consisted of
three steps:

  1. Principles, standards, procedures, etc. (in relation to long-term access infrastructure to preserve data) from the research data community were selected. 

  

  2. These were presented to policy makers (concerning the information architecture) in the EHRI consortium. 

  

  3. We assessed to what extent the standards etc. are relevant / of value for the curators for CHIs (in the EHRI consortium). 

  

  

The workshop in summer 2017 (31 July - 1 August) played an important role in
this assessment process. The summary of this workshop can be found in Chapter
3. The next section discusses the input from the research data community.

##  Input from the research data community

Management of digital assets is discussed in several communities, such as the
cultural heritage community, the records management community and the research
data community. Although each community uses methods, standards, terminology
and governance models specific to its needs, there are a number of lessons to
be learned and applied to the development of a data management policy for
EHRI. Since the assets managed by EHRI partners are primarily aimed at
scholarly users, it is particularly useful for this work package to take a
closer look at data management aspects provided by the research data
community.

The following data management principles, standards and procedures from the
research data community serve as input:

  1. FAIR data principles, aimed at the quality of _data objects_ . 

  

  2. Guidelines of Certification for Trustworthy Digital Repositories, aimed at the quality of _repositories_ that curate digital objects. 

  

  3. Services provided by European Research Infrastructures (e.g. EUDAT), aimed at _services_ that support data management. 

  

  

Each of the above aspects (data, repositories, services) acts as a reference
for the assessment of data management issues relevant to CHIs curating
Holocaust data objects.

###  FAIR data principles  1

The FAIR data principles are aimed at making data Findable, Accessible,
Interoperable, and Reusable. Each principle is clarified below:

  1. The _Findable_ data principle. 

  

  

The findable principle concerns the assignment of persistent identifiers to
digital objects, to provide rich metadata and to register the data in a
searchable resource.

To be findable:

F1. (meta)data are assigned a globally unique and persistent identifier

F2. data are described with rich metadata (defined by R1 below)

F3. metadata clearly and explicitly include the identifier of the data it
describes

F4. (meta)data are registered or indexed in a searchable resource

  2. The _Accessible_ data principle. 

  

  

The accessible principle is related to the retrieval of objects by their
identifier and the availability of metadata. To be accessible:

A1. (meta)data are retrievable by their identifier using a standardized
communications protocol

A1.1 the protocol is open, free, and universally implementable

A1.2 the protocol allows for an authentication and authorization procedure,
where necessary

A2. metadata are accessible, even when the data are no longer available

  3. The _Interoperable_ data principle. 

  

  

Interoperability is realised by using formal, broadly applicable languages for
knowledge representation and qualified references. To be interoperable: I1.
(meta)data use a formal, accessible, shared, and broadly applicable language
for knowledge representation

I2. (meta)data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles I3. (meta)data
include qualified references to other (meta)data

  4. The _Reusable_ data principle. 

  

  

The reusable principle involves the application of rich, accurate metadata,
clear licenses, provenance and use of community standards. To be re-usable:

R1. meta(data) are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant
attributes

R1.1. (meta)data are released with a clear and accessible data usage license

R1.2. (meta)data are associated with detailed provenance

R1.3. (meta)data meet domain-relevant community standards

###  Guidelines for Certification for Trustworthy Digital Repositories

A Trusted Digital Repository (TDR) has the mission to provide reliable, long-
term access to managed digital resources to its so-called “designated
community”  2  . A designated community is an identified group of potential
consumers who should be able to understand a particular set of information. A
number of criteria and guidelines have been established regarding the long-
term sustainability of digital data.

A European Framework for Audit and Certification of Digital Repositories was
set up to help organisations in obtaining appropriate certification as a
trusted digital repository  3  . It has established three increasingly
demanding levels of assessment: _Basic Certification_ , consisting of self-
assessment and external review of the criteria that are part of the Data Seal
of Approval (DSA); _Extended Certification_ , including the Basic
Certification and additionally and externally reviewed self-assessment against
a more fine-grained ISO standard (ISO 16363); and _Formal Certification_ , the
validation of the self-assessment through a third-party official audit based
on the ISO standard.

The workshop presents the TDR assessment frameworks with an emphasis on the
Data Seal of Approval (  _http://datasealofapproval.org_ )  4  . Fundamental
to the DSA guidelines are five criteria, that together determine whether or
not the digital research data may be qualified as sustainably archived:

  * The research data can be found on the Internet. 

  

  * The research data are accessible, while taking into account relevant legislation with regard to personal information and intellectual property of the data. 

  

  * The research data are available in a usable format. 

  

  * The research data are reliable. 

  

  * The research data can be referred to. 

  

###  Services provided by the European Research Infrastructure EUDAT

The EUDAT initiative aims at developing and supporting research data services
for all scientific disciplines and that support the data lifecycle. The
Humanities are an important target group for EUDAT. The EUDAT “B2Service
Suite” consists of services to exchange, synchronize, store, share, replicate,
protect and find data (See:  _http://eudat.eu_ )  .The EUDAT services suite or
Collaborative Data Infrastructure (CDI) consists of seven services. They are
briefly described below.

The B2DROP service can be characterized as a personal cloud storage service.
It is a secure and trusted data exchange service  5  .

The next service of the EUDAT Services Suite is the B2SHARE service to store
and share small-scale research data from diverse contexts  6  . The service
automatically assigns persistent identifiers to records. The B2SHARE service
assigns handle PIDs  7  . Depositors can document their data objects and give
the data a usage license, preferably an open access license.

The third service of the EUDAT CDI is the B2SAFE service. This service allows
community and department repositories to implement data management policies on
research data across multiple administrative domains.

The B2STAGE service enables the movement of large amounts of data between data
stores and high-performance computing resources.

The B2FIND service can be characterized as a simple, user-friendly metadata
catalogue of research data collections stored in EUDAT data centres and other
repositories. The service provides access to resources that are also available
in the EHRI portal. This is because a repository is harvested both by the
B2FIND service and the EHRI-portal  8  .

B2HANDLE provides an abstraction layer between a globally unique persistent
identifier and a physical location of a data object allowing researchers to
reliably cite and refer in the long term.

B2ACCESS provides an easy-to-use and secure authentication and authorization
platform integrated in all other services. It provides various methods of
authentication through the home organisation identity provider, but also
allows social IDs like Google and Facebook as well as the EUDAT ID. Managers
can specify authorisation decisions in the dedicated interface.

Figure 2 gives an overview of the services of the EUDAT Collaborative Data
Infrastructure (CDI). The EUDAT project ends early 2018 and this of course
obstructs the realisation of a sustainable trustworthy infrastructure. EUDAT,
however, will be part of the “European Open Science Cloud” (EOSC) that is
planned to emerge on the basis on several European data infrastructure
initiative. Concerning data management services EHRI should keep an eye on
this development as it can play a role in the long-term access to EHRI
databases.

**Figure 2:** The services of the EUDAT Collaborative Data Infrastructure

##  Towards a long-term access infrastructure

The challenge in task 13.2, Secure Long-term Access Infrastructure for the
Preservation of Holocaust Research Objects, is to collect, formulate and
disseminate knowledge and expertise on the management and long-term
preservation of digital objects of value to the 20 archives in the consortium
and beyond. The sources of information come both from the EHRI partners and
from the community that develops and maintains services in the field of
research data management. This process is described below:

  1. The collection phase 

  

  

The main idea is to assess services, systems and procedures of the EHRI
partners to curate digital objects in relation to reference models and data
infrastructure services that have their origin in the research data management
field. As not all EHRI partners have the same capability with regard to data
management and long-term preservation, a consultation is carried out. An
important part of the collection phase is the workshop on data management
planning and becoming a trusted digital repository.

  2. The formulation phase 

  

  

State of the art information on research data management and long-term
archiving is provided in the present report, presented in Chapter 3 as the
outcomes of the workshop. This report is available to the EHRI consortium.

  3. The dissemination phase 

  

  

The main focus of the dissemination phase will be the formulation of a long-
term access infrastructure for preserving digital Holocaust objects that is
scheduled to be delivered near the end of the EHRI project. The long-term
access infrastructure for preserving Holocaust research objects is the subject
of Deliverable 13.2. The formulation of this infrastructure will be based on
input from the research data community. See Figure 1.

#  Workshop Outcomes

This chapter contains a report of an EHRI workshop on data management
organised on 31 July and 1 August 2017.

##  Program & Content Workshop

The workshop consisted of two days: the first day’s topic was Data Management
Planning, whereas the second day’s topic was Long Term Access to Holocaust
Data. Three presentations were given the first day, according to the topics
that are described in Section 2.3: FAIR Principles (by Peter Doorn),
Certification of Trusted Digital Repository (by Heiko Tjalsma), and Data
Infrastructure Services (by René van Horik). In addition, a presentation on
digital information management at the Dutch National Archives was given by
Margriet van Gorsel. For the second day, participants were asked to prepare
slides about their view on Archiving, Access, and Policies. A summary of these
discussions can be found in Section 3.4.

**Figure 3:** Program of the Workshop

##  Workshop participants

Within the EHRI consortium partners were approached that have experience with
managing data assets, e.g. because they operate information management
systems. Another activity concerns data management policies. The workshop
participants are thus able to evaluate the value data management policy issues
have for the whole EHRI consortium and beyond. Six EHRI partners were
represented: CDEC, WL, DANS, USHMM,fc Yad Vashem and NIOD. The following
persons / EHRI partners contributed to the workshop:  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

Laura Brazzo

</th>  
<th>

Fondazione Centro di Documentazione Ebraica Contemporanea (CDEC)

</th> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

Jessica Green

</td>  
<td>

The Wiener Library (WL)

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

René van Horik

</td>  
<td>

Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

Tonke de Jong

</td>  
<td>

Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

Michael Levy

</td>  
<td>

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM)

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

Effi Neumann

</td>  
<td>

Yad Vashem (YV)

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

Annelies van Nispen

</td>  
<td>

NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies (NIOD)

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

Frank Uiterwaal

</td>  
<td>

NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies (NIOD)

</td> </tr> </table>

##  Workshop Day 1: Data Management Planning Introduction

The workshop started with an introduction in which the context and strategy of
the activities related to this workshop were described. This introduction to a
large extent contains the information as given in chapter 2. A couple of
remarks were given by the workshop participants:

  1. Data management planning (DMP) in first instance is directed towards the researchers who elaborate on how they deal with data they use and create. In EHRI the data provider perspective is more prominent than this data user perspective. In EHRI a great deal of historians are active who work in a traditional way. DMP in EHRI must be directed on the archives rather than on the users. 

  

  2. Also data-reuse and the management of licenses should be added to the topics (see page 6) 

  

  3. Participants have experienced that certification of repositories can be very expensive. It can, however, play an important role in educating / training the people in the organisation on policies with regard to long-term access to digital assets. 

  

  

##  DMP aspect 1: FAIR data principles

Presenter: Peter Doorn (Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS))

Title of presentation: “FAIR Data Assessment of Datasets in Trusted Digital
Repositories”

Link to slides:  _https://b2drop.eudat.eu/s/atw1lonNKULP9yp_

Remarks and comments by the workshop participants:

  1. The assignment and management of persistent identifiers turns out to be a very important component of data that is “FAIR”. Several practical questions concerning this were exchanged. E.g. on how to get PIDs for objects. A solution of getting PIDs for publications is to become a member of DataCite  9  (or join a national member of DataCite). The importance of PIDs for the EHRI infrastructure was confirmed a couple of times. 

  

  2. Although the complete implementation of the FAIR principles is considered as too 

  

  

much for the EHRI consortium as a whole, the principles can still be
considered as good guidelines. The FAIR data assessment tool (currently as
prototype) might be relevant for EHRI at a later stage.

  3. Some EHRI partners manage / create Linked Open Data. This type of data is by definition of high quality in terms of FAIR criteria. 

  

  4. As privacy protection / license issues are very important in the EHRI consortium several FAIR criteria (e.g. Findable) will not be fully supported. 

  

  5. For EHRI the “data scope” is rather on archival collections than on research data sets. This perspective is probably new in the FAIR data community and EHRI might consider to put this perspective more to the forefront. 

  

  

##  DMP aspect 2: Certification of TDR’s

Presenter: Heiko Tjalsma (Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS))

Title of presentation “Certification of TDRs”

Link to slides:  _https://b2drop.eudat.eu/s/Lsdi8LMuFSpPUMr_ Remarks and
comments by the workshop participants:

  1. Outsourcing of services (e.g. archival storage) does not influence the certification situation for an archive. The service provider now has to “prove” that the certification requirements are met. So the certification guidelines might have to be assessed over several service providers. 

  

  2. It might be the case that not all aspects of the certification are public (e.g. for security reasons). The reviewer, obviously, must have access to all relevant information in order to assess the quality of the repository. This issue is certainly applicable in EHRI. 

  

  3. The certification requirements are of value in a “self-assessment” process. 

  

  

Repositories can evaluate several aspects of the organisation of the data
without any consequence.

  4. EHRI is in the process to become an ERIC. In other ERICs (e.g. CLARIN) the certification of repositories plays a role to improve the quality of the repositories involved. And still the majority of the repositories in CLARIN do not have a certification. The way other ERICs engage with repository certification should be taken into consideration by EHRI. 

  

  5. The EHRI Content Provider Agreement (CPA) was discussed in relation to some certification rules. The CPA is not signed by all EHRI partners and also the formulation of the agreement has undergone several versions. An important issue is the ownership of the data, especially after the transfer of the data from the archive to the EHRI portal. This issue is not unambiguously settled in the EHRI project. 

  

  6. The assessment of certification guidelines is not a trivial activity. Carrying out a full certification process is for most EHRI partners not possible. Within EHRI in first instance awareness raising on the importance to assess features of the data management infrastructure is of value as it will provide an overview of aspects that are relevant for the management of digital objects. 

  

  

##  Information Management at the National Archives

Presenter: Margriet van Gorsel (Dutch National Archives)

Title of presentation: “Digital Information Management”

Link to slides:  _https://b2drop.eudat.eu/s/xCXBzYytcpqpgOt_ Remarks and
comments by the workshop participants:

  1. The design and management of an “information chain” as presented is seen as 

  

  

relevant and has some resemblance with the EHRI project (several data
providers and one service provider). Process based on standards, but
exceptions do occur.

  2. The National Archives repositories have received the dataseal of approval (replaced by the “CoreTrustSeal” in the future). 

  

  

##  DMP aspect 3: Data infrastructure services

Presenter: René van Horik (Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS))

Title of presentation: “Data infrastructure services of the EUDAT CDI” Link to
slides:  _https://b2drop.eudat.eu/s/OclvzCfpts7nAgJ_ Remarks and comments by
the workshop participants:

  1. It seems several tools and services are available for data management (e.g. the ones provided by the EUDAT CDI). The threshold to use some of them is quite high. One must be trained. Also the sustainability of the service is an issue: what will happen with the services once the EUDAT project is over? A follow-up initiative has started (European Open Science Cloud - EOSC) but it is not clear what its potential value is for EHRI. 

  

  2. It is important to make a distinction between a data infrastructure and a research infrastructure. Some services of EUDAT are of value. B2DROP is already used in the EHRI project as exchange service for sample data sets. 

  

  3. The discussion of the store, share, archive, etc. services of EUDAT gives also insight in the EHRI information architecture. E.g. on issues such as the updating of records, the long-term perspective of the EHRI portal. We should start with an inventory of what is needed, prioritise and then plan the next steps. 

  

  4. Services that deal with privacy protection and authorized access (identity provision by B2ACCESS) is relevant for EHRI. 

  

  

##  Workshop day 2: Archiving, Access and Policies at the EHRI institutes

In relation to long-term access to digital objects three aspects were
discussed: (1) archiving, (2) access and (3) policies. Each workshop
participant provided input on each aspect.

The “archiving” aspect concerns issues related to the storage of digital
objects by organisations that curate digital Holocaust objects. Questions
related to this aspect are:

  1. What kind of digital objects do you manage? 

  

  2. Where do you store these objects? 

  

  3. How do you monitor the quality of the digital objects? 

  

  4. Details on the information systems you use 

  

  

The “access” aspect concerns issues related to the management of access to
digital objects.

Questions related to this aspect are:

  1. How do you manage the access to the digital objects? 

  

  2. How do you protect the objects? 

  

  3. Details on licenses / legal issues 

  

  

The “policies” aspect concerns issues related to the formulation of policies
to provide longterm access to digital objects. Questions related to this
aspect are:

  1. Which stakeholders are involved in managing the digital collection? 

  

  2. Details on the business model to manage digital assets 

  

  3. With whom do you cooperate? 

  

  4. How do you check / monitor the quality of your assets? 

  

  

Each workshop participant (representing an organisation that manages digital
Holocaust objects) provided input on the long-term access aspects. See below.

##  The Wiener Library

(Jessica Green)

**Concerning _archiving_ : **

The Wiener Library is currently undertaking an ambitious digital
transformation, as we move towards more sustainable and efficient processes
for creating, managing, preserving and accessing digital records.

Over the last few decades, the Library’s digital holdings have grown to
include approximately 18 TB of digital material, including audio and video
files, databases, photographs, document scans, and more. Some of this material
has been digitised in-house or by third-parties from their original analogue
or paper formats, while a growing percentage of it is born-digital. In
addition to being a digital copy holder of the International Tracing Service
(ITS), the Library has accepted a number of large digital collections over the
last year, including, most notably, a digital copy of the UN War Crimes
Commission Archive. The Library expects a growth of digital collections
donations over the next few years in a range of different formats, including
large databases, audiovisual collections, and sets of PDFs/TIFF files with a
corresponding Excel spreadsheet of metadata. In order to support this type of
growth, the Library is taking steps towards improving and standardising
methods for accessioning, cataloguing, making accessible, and preserving this
digital collections.

One of the Library’s short-term goals is to finalise a digital preservation
policy to ensure longterm preservation of digitised materials, born-digital
material, and large digital collections. There are currently a range of
different file formats stored in a number of different locations on our shared
servers, individual email accounts, a few hard drives and digital tape. The
Library is currently working towards gathering all scans of collection items,
born-digital material, and digital collections into a separate shared drive.
Files in this drive will then be organised by collection type and renamed
according to their collection ID number. This will make linking between
catalogue records and their digital objects more straightforward. In addition,
the files will be moved to a dedicated server in a secure data centre this
October. In order to ensure files are accessible for the long term and to
mitigate the effects of obsolescence, work is being done to forward-migrate
existing files to file formats that are considered better for long-term
preservation. This includes converting JPEGs to TIFFs and VLC media files to
MP4s. The digital preservation policy will also cover future forwardmigration
of preservation files, multiple methods for backups, and running checksums.
The Library recognises that digital preservation is an ongoing activity that
is never complete; taking these steps and continuously reviewing/updating our
policy will help the Library bring itself in line with best practice for long-
term digital preservation. Since the Library can learn from others and help
others learn, we are using guidelines from the Digital Preservation Coalition
(DPC) and other professional bodies to inform our decisions and plan to share
our policies and procedures with EHRI and other interested bodies. The end
goal is for digital preservation practices to be as embedded into the
Library’s daily work as the physical preservation of its collections.

**Concerning _access_ : **

The Wiener Library currently provides access to our digital holdings through a
range of different information systems and is working to improve the
searching, retrieval, and display of these digital objects for its staff and
users. Access to ITS is provided to researchers on two dedicated terminals in
our Reading Room using the OusArchiv database. Before using these terminals,
researchers have to attend a training instruction and make appointments in
advance. Our ITS Archive Researcher is on hand to help people use and search
this database, as well as to conduct research for people unable to visit the
Library themselves. Three other dedicated terminals provide researchers with
read-only access to some of our digital collections (including the UNWCC
archive), as well as video and audio recordings via segmented drives on our
server. To prevent people from downloading files, the Library has disabled
internet access and USB ports on the Reading Room terminals that have access
to this segmented drive. A small number of photographs are available to view
on our online catalogue, Soutron. Currently the only way to attach images to
our catalogue records is to upload thumbnail versions of the images into the
catalogue database directly. This is an unsustainable model for providing
online access to our digital materials, since the more files, and the larger
the files, the slower the entire catalogue becomes.

In order to provide more materials online and at our dedicated terminals, the
Library is exploring the implementation of a digital viewer that would link
high-res digitised images of documents and photographs to their relevant
catalogue record. This would allow for a richer user experience, including
zooming in and out of a photograph, as well as help to comply with copyright
and data protection regulations by restricting access to digital files based
on IP address or logins.

The main system Library staff use to access our digital objects currently is
Adobe Bridge. As materials were digitised, descriptive information was added
directly into the embedded metadata of the images. The main method for finding
a digital object is to search Bridge for keywords and search terms that might
be included in this embedded metadata. The Photo Archivist is currently
working on turning this embedded metadata into ISAD(g) compliant catalogue
records in Soutron, so that our users can access, search and find these images
as well.

All Library staff have recently undergone a mandatory copyright training
session. Our

Collections Team is evaluating our policies around granting licenses for use
of digital images as part of the follow-up to this. In developing our access
policies, the Library aims to make accessible as many of our digital objects
as possible, taking into account financial, technical, and copyright/data
protection restrictions. This is based on the belief that digital users are
just as valid and important as physical users to the Library; as such, they
should have access to rich material and metadata online as well as onsite.

**Concerning _policies_ : **

The Wiener Library is currently developing its policies around management and
long-term access to digital objects. The requirements for digital objects are
just as important as for physical objects, but more challenging to embed into
our daily practices due to technological and budgetary constraints, as well as
a deficit of digital skills. Although this shift towards managing and
providing access to more digital objects brings with it certain challenges, it
is something that benefits our staff and users greatly and is becoming more
and more expected over time. Policies are being developed with both the needs
of our users and staff in mind, as well as keeping an eye towards future
trends and best practices. Sharing policies and business models for managing
digital assets across like organisations would be helpful to this process.

##  USHMM

(Michael Levy)

**Concerning _archiving_ : **

USHMM digital archiving practice

  * Intensive digitization began 2006 with magnetic media, oral history. International copy archive projects more and more digital. Digitization of microfilm, historical film, paper archives, photos 

  

  * 50 million+ digital files, growing 

  

  * ~800 TB, growing 

  

  * State-of-the-art NAS w/erasure coding 

  

  * Tape backup. Offsite secure storage of backup 

  

  * Inventories, checksums. Currently using open source tools to crawl and store. md5 and sha1 are utilized. The process takes many months 

  

  * Compare recalculated inventory and checksum to store checksums every ~24 months 

  

  * Currently engaged in RFP process intended to supply commercial digital preservation platform, to automate digital preservation activities. Follow OAIS model ISO 14721:2012 

  

  * Web archiving of our own institution's digital output 

  

  * Informal relationship with US Government Publication Office. GPO uses the nonprofit Internet Archive's “Archive-It” service for archiving web and social media output 

  

What are the requirements for Holocaust archives in general?

  * Desirable for every Holocaust archive to begin to engage with digital preservation activities 

  

  * Recognize that digital assets with long term value require active preservation measures 

  

Suggestions for implementation:

  * Training, workshops, other educational processes 

  

  * Blog posts 

  

  * Other educational efforts 

  

  * Start with small steps: “Do something” 

  

  * Self-assessment 

  

  * “NDSA Levels of Digital Preservation” may be a good place to start for many organizations and practitioners 

  

  * Storage and Geographic Location (Levels 1-4) File Fixity and Data Integrity (Levels 1 to 4) 

  

  * Information Security (Levels 1 to 4) 

  

  * Metadata (Levels 1 to 4) 

  

  * File Formats (Levels 1 to 4) 

  

**Concerning _access_ : **

  * Collections Search 

  

  * Provide access to all catalog records and to “use copies” of media –- on web if possible, locally-only if not allowed; certain materials are highly restricted or embargoed 

  

  * Ensure everything on web is searchable by web crawlers e.g. Google - User studies, improve UX 

  

  * Permanent URLs or HTTP 301 redirects (so old links to records still work) 

  

  * Handles –- contracts with users for a permanent place on the web (we hope to implement at USHMM eventually) 

  

  * Constant improvement 

  

  * Technology changes. Obsolescence. Security standards. User expectations continually increase 

  

What are the requirements for Holocaust archives in general?

  * Broadest allowable access is desirable: increased access leads to broader use and interest, strengthens the field of Holocaust research overall, and thus leads to continued or increased support 

  

Suggestions for implementation

  * Continued support, strengthening and broadening the EHRI Portal and digital tools 

  

**Concerning _policies_ : **

USHMM Digital Preservation and Access Policies:

  * Competing priorities include: 

  

  * Quality (e.g. file formats, resolutions, bit rates) 

  

  * Quantity / funding 

  

  * Preservation, redundancy, resources 

  

  * Every institution is unique 

  

  * Quantity: File sizes affect preservation operations (e.g.time) & redundancy 

  

  * USHMM distinguishes between “asset” and “instance” to help balance resource priorities 

  

  * Asset = only trustworthy copy (e.g. magnetic media or fragile originals, born digital); irreplaceable, therefore warrants utmost attention 

  

  * Instance = surrogate of a durable physical item, or a derivative; replaceable at a cost 

  

What are the requirements for Holocaust archives in general?

  * Institutions are each unique and must develop digitization policies according to their institutional responsibilities and requirements 

  

##  NIOD

(Annelies van Nispen & Frank Uiterwaal)

**Concerning _archiving_ : **

  * NIOD has digitized archives, digitized photo’s, research databases, audiovisual material and manages this with Dutch partners; 

  

  * The material is stored at KNAW’s infrastructure or at dedicated partners as DANS or Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision; 

  

  * The partners are specialized in Digital Preservation and we trust them. The KNAW infrastructure needs to be of high quality. (SLA: backup, disaster recovery); 

  

  * Specifications on the quality of the objects are project-based (Metamorfoze Digitisation Programme) 

  

What are the requirements for Holocaust archives in general?: Hybrid archives
with multiple sorts of digital objects. One-solution-fits-all approach will
not work.

**Concerning _access_ : **

  * Different digital objects are managed by specialized partners, eg. Research data/Testimonials (DANS); Audiovisual material (NIBG); - External Access is controlled by: 

  

  * Archiefwet; 

  

  * Privacy Protection Laws; - Copyright. 

  

  * Internal access to the storage of digital objects is controlled (based on someone’s role within the organisation); 

  

  * Persistent Identifiers need to be implemented within a few years. 

  

##  CDEC

(Laura Brazzo)

CDEC has started a project to integrate its archival description databases,
research databases, digitized (and digital born) material (papers,
photographs, tape and video recordings) objects, as well as its library
catalog. The goals of the project are to overcome, fragmented information, to
avoid duplicated resources and to implement lacking measures for the long term
preservation of data. The project can be summarized as "integration",
"interoperability" and "preservation".

The digital asset management system used is the Linked Data platform
“openDams/Bygle” (created by the company “regesta.exe”), based on W3C
recommendations. It works as a data integration layer allowing the integration
of heterogeneous data sources. Data from research databases and the library's
catalog have been converted into and are imported in the system  10  .

Archival descriptions and digitized material are managed by xDams, an OS XML
web-based platform, that is integrated inopenDams. It works as the main data
provider of openDams. The metadata are stored in xDams in native XML
databases. To encode the metadata in XML format, the EAD data model is used
for the description of the archival resources. The EAC-CPF data model is used
for the description of authority records.

Authority files (managed through openDams) are Uniform Resource Identifiers
(URIs) linked to the archival descriptions by a lookup function. Linked
resources are encoded in the related XML EAD files

Digitized material (papers, photographs, audios and videos) are attached to
the appropriate archival description records. The xDams Platform enables the
creation of an XML repository containing the metadata needed to the
description of all the digital attachments referenced in the databases. To
ensure consistency and validity to the referenced digital objects, the METS
11  standard is adopted. EAD and EAC-CPF are used in conjunction with METS in
descriptive and administrative metadata contexts. The next, scheduled, step
forward is the transforming of archival descriptions currently in XML, into
the RDF format (using the OAD - Archival Description Ontology as data model)
in order to support interoperability as well as a sustainability of data.

Compared to the beginning of the project (in 2013), significant progress has
been made. Firstly we have set up a basic architecture for the data
management. A lot of work, though, still needs to be done in order to not-to-
lose resources in the coming years. One of this is definitely the upgrade of
the Quest online journal  12  with a better set of descriptive metadata and
the attribution of DOI as persistent identifiers of each published article.
High resolution master images of the digitized materials are stored in the
CDEC storage system. An agreement between CDEC and UCEI (Union of the Italian
Jewish Communities) about the keeping of the backup copy in Rome is under
review.

High resolution copies (TIFF, MOV, WAV) are stored in a “Networked Attached
Storage” (NAS) storage (RAID5 Hot Spare, Redundant, Access controlled)
localized at the CDEC Foundation. Data, metadata and low-resolution copies of
digitized materials attached to the archival descriptions (JPEG, Mp3, mp4) are
stored directly by Regesta on a remote Virtual Machine localized off-site.

##  DANS

(René van Horik)

**Concerning _archiving_ : **

(expresses as so-called URIs) are imported in openDams/Bygle and published in
a triplestore accessible through an intranet Sparql endpoint. Every new item
created by openDams is natively a URI (see for example:
<http://dati.cdec.it/lod/shoah/person/251> or  <
_http://dati.cdec.it/lod/shoah/place/Milano_ > [cited 5 October 2017].

  11. Metadata Encoding and Transcription Standard. See: <http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/> [cited 4 October 2017]. 

  

  12. Quest. Issues in Contemporary Jewish History. Published by CDEC. See: <www.questcdecjournal.it> [cited 5 October 2017]. 

  

  

The collection “World War II” has been created by DANS  11  . The collection
consists of datasets that have been deposited by researchers. Keywords
provided by the data depositors have been used to create the thematic
collection.

Most of the datasets contain oral history material. Many of these datasets are
the result of the national program “Heritage of the War” (2005-2009) that
improved access to the large variety of WOII collections and thereby
contributed to the advance of knowledge of WOII. The metadata is open
accessible and harvestable (by OAI-PMH). The datasets are harvested by several
organisations and enriched (for instance by the B2FIND service of EUDAT (see
section 2.3.3)). Authentication of the datasets is realised by its persistent
identifier and metadata. If applicable an additional streaming service is
available so the interview can be seen  12  . The average size of an interview
is 2 GB. For the archival storage of the data a third party is used.

**Concerning access:**

The access to data objects is managed by an information system
(http://easy.dans.knaw.nl) and is based on a user license. Three types of
access can be distinguished. In the first place “Open Access” in two versions.
One version requires registration of the user whereas the other version does
not. The second version of access is “Restricted Access” and this implies that
the user has to ask the owner of the data permission to get access. This
request for access can be made via the information system. After the
permission is granted the user can get access to the data. The third type of
access is classified as “Other Access” and can have several appearances, e.g
an embargo on the access special conditions for access.

Secure storage of the data sets is based on a data management policy in which
third party services (e.g. data centre) are involved. All metadata of the
datasets can be harvested.

**Concerning _policies_ : **

The policy concerning data management at DANS can be characterized as “”Open
if possible, closed if necessary”. The repository has a DSA seal as well as a
NESTOR seal  15  . Concerning data formats, DANS has formulated a “preferred
format policy”. Preferred formats are file formats of which DANS is confident
that they will offer the best long-term guarantees in terms of usability,
accessibility and sustainability. Depositing research data in preferred
formats will always be accepted by DANS. Acceptable formats are file formats
that are widely used in addition to the preferred formats, and which will be
moderately to reasonably usable, accessible and robust in the long term. DANS
favours the use of preferred formats, but acceptable formats will in most
cases also be allowed  13  .

##  Brainstorm and Discussion

The workshop participants decided to create a mindmap to formulate the main
outcomes of the workshop  14  . The main topic of the discussion concerned the
value of the the three data management planning aspects presented at the first
day (FAIR data principles, repository certification and data management
services of the EUDAT CDI) for the formulation of a data management policy for
the long-term preservation of Holocaust data. The output of the discussion
will be used to work on a long-term access infrastructure (Deliverable 13.2)
to be delivered in early 2019.

The mindmap created can be found in Figure 4.

12 September 2017].

**Figure 4:** Mindmap of the discussion

#  Conclusion and next steps

All in all, a fruitful workshop was held on data management planning for long-
term preservation of Holocaust objects, attended by representatives of
organisations in the EHRI consortium that manage and curate digital objects.
The first day’s goal was to get all participants acquainted with data
management building blocks from the research perspective. The second day’s
goal was to discuss current data management practices at the different
institutes.

In addition, the roadmap for a long-term access infrastructure (LTA) was
discussed. The participants of the workshop agreed on a structure for the LTA.
The roadmap consists of three parts: archiving of data, access to data and
policies to implement the LTA. Each part is elaborated on below. The
activities carried out to establish EHRI as a permanent legal entity by
becoming an ERIC obviously will play an important role in the formulation of
the LTA. The activities carried out will be complementary to the work done in
relation to the development of the ERIC. The LTA for preserving Holocaust
Research Objects will be published as Deliverable 13.2 and is foreseen for
month 44 in the EHRI project.

Concerning “archiving” the work on the roadmap for a LTA consists of five
aspects:

  1. Classification of the data that has to be curated by the LTA. It also concerns the selection of the data objects that have to be archived for the long-term. 

  

  2. Alternatives for the archival storage of data objects. 

  

  3. An assessment of available data formats for the data objects with respect to its durability. 

  

  4. The role of persistent identifiers in the LTA. Which identifier scheme can be used in which situation as well as practical implementation issues. 

  

  5. The monitoring of the LTA concerns the periodic evaluation of the quality of the components of the LTA and possible procedures to keep the archiving services of the LTA uptodate. 

  

  

Concerning the “access” to data objects the LTA roadmap will pay attention to
three issues:

  1. Legal issues, such as licensing models and ways to protect sensitive Holocaust archives and personal information according to the latest European (and American for USHMM/Israeli for Yad Vashem) legislation. 

  

  2. Secured access is the next topic. This consists of AAI (Authentication and Authorisation Infrastructure) services such as the identity management of users of data objects. 

  

  3. Search engine optimization (SEO) that uses web-analytics (statistics) to improve the access to data objects. 

  

  

Concerning “data management policies” for the LTA roadmap five aspects will be
covered.

  1. Security policies. Coverage of aspects such as data protection, data access conditions and management of user data. 

  

  2. Cooperation models. This activity will evaluate how the current EHRI Content Provider Agreement can be used to formalise cooperation with stakeholders. 

  

  3. Attention is paid to business models that facilitate the long-term operation of the LTA. 

  

  4. The role of certification frameworks is part of the quality control of the LTA. 

  

  5. Long-term viability of the LTA is the last aspect of data management policies for the LTA roadmap. 

  

  

The workshop participants discussed the process to define the LTA roadmap and
came to a proposal for a timeline. The proposed activities are:

  * The certification of data repositories is considered an important component of the LTA roadmap. This workshop has paid attention to the topic Trusted Digital Repository by discussing certification frameworks, such as the “Data Seal of Approval” (that is succeeded by the “Core Trust Seal”). The topic Trusted Digital Repository is the subject of deliverable D13.4. We consider to organise a workshop at the EHRI general partner meeting in June 2018 so all partners in EHRI can be informed on aspects of repository certification. 

  

  * Based on the outcomes of the DMP and TDR workshop the LTA roadmap will be defined and created in December 2018 as deliverable D13.2. All participants of the workshop have confirmed that they will, given available resources, contribute to the content of the roadmap.