Download (PDF, 9MB, Not barrier-free file.) - Nestor

German repositories have already been awarded the 2004 or 2007 DINI Certificate. Thenestor catalog is in the process of being transformed into a DIN standard 26 , and TRACforms the basis of the efforts of the Birds of a Feather (BOF) working group currentlycreating a document to be submitted to ISO for consideration as an internationalstandard. 27This study uses selected criteria from the above-mentioned catalogs to investigatethe approaches to long-term preservation taken by the three repositories on which it willfocus. The benefits which can be gained from this, even if the repositories to which thecatalogs will be applied do not aim at becoming long-term archives themselves, aredescribed in a recent article by Steinhart, Dietrich, and Green in which they summarizetheir experiences in applying the TRAC criteria to DataStaR, a data-staging repositorycurrently developed at Cornell University. As they explain, theydecided to investigate and incorporate best practices related to digital preservation to the fullestextent possible even though DataStaR is not intended to serve as a long-term preservationrepository […]. There are good reasons for taking this approach. First, […] policies and bestpractices for repositories seem to be best developed in the digital preservation community, anddigital preservation frameworks have much to offer that bears on responsible management ofrepositories, regardless of a repository's stated preservation commitment [...]. Digitalpreservation frameworks also emphasize the importance of establishing trust, and howrepositories can demonstrate trustworthiness with certain kinds of evidence. (2009, no pag.)As this quotation indicates, traditional repository tasks and long-term preservation tasksare not as far removed from each other as one might think: thus, trustworthiness issomething that both traditional and preservation-centered repositories should strive toachieve. At the same time, the observations of Steinhart et al. serve to “justify” theapproach taken in this study, which uses the criteria catalogs introduced above asguidelines as to which aspects need to be considered in particular if a repository wants tobe prepared to take at least a shared responsibility for the long-term preservation of itsdigital assets, that is, without becoming a long-term archive itself.In order to keep this study within the set limits (both with regard to time and tolength), the number of criteria used has been reduced. Not only were some criteria simplynot relevant in the current context, but also the decision was made to focus in particularon the actual management of digital objects (implemented procedures carried out both byhuman staff and software-aided) as well as the areas of policy and technicalinfrastructure. Finally, the (organizational and disciplinary) context in which eachrepository is embedded was also considered briefly. In contrast, despite their importancecriteria dealing primarily with questions of user access have been largely disregarded forthe reasons just mentioned. Instead I have worked based on the assumption (whether thisis entirely justified is certainly to be questioned) that a repository which fulfills the non-26 A first version of the standard was scheduled to be presented in the DIN Standards Committee meeting onOctober 13, 2009 (cf. the timetable of the nestor working group “Vertrauenswürdige Archive” onhttp://www.langzeitarchivierung.de – 30.10.2009).27 See http://wiki.digitalrepositoryauditandcertification.org/bin/view for further details – 30.10.2009.14