• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Jackie dooley to asis&t ohio on ead & archival desc 20111018
 

Jackie dooley to asis&t ohio on ead & archival desc 20111018

on

  • 520 views

Overview of the evolution of U.S. standards for archival description, including NISTF work, NUCMC, MARC-AMC, APPM, EAD, DACS, EAC, and the Social Networks and Archival Description project.

Overview of the evolution of U.S. standards for archival description, including NISTF work, NUCMC, MARC-AMC, APPM, EAD, DACS, EAC, and the Social Networks and Archival Description project.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
520
Views on SlideShare
520
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
4
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Jackie dooley to asis&t ohio on ead & archival desc 20111018 Jackie dooley to asis&t ohio on ead & archival desc 20111018 Presentation Transcript

    • EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description Jackie DooleyProgram Officer OCLC Research Central Ohio ASIS&T 18 October 2011
    • Why is EAD important? For the first time, a standard set of data elements was defined for describing archival materials. … and this is what has made everything else possible.EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 2
    • Timeline The olden days pre-1983 NUCMC 1959 NISTF1977 Catalog record structure (MARC) 1983 <------- Content rules (APPM) 1983 Long pause ….. Finding aid record structure (EAD) 1998 New content rules (DACS) 2004 Authority record structure (EAC) 2010 Authority record prototype (SNAC) 2011 Integrated archival systems!! ????EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 3
    • The olden days: Pre-1983 Special features! • No standard data elements • No formatting conventions • No authority files • No tracking of added entries • Subject headings home-grown, if anyEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 4
    • The olden days: Pre-1983EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 5
    • The olden days: Still good enough? or, Why catalog it when you can just Google it? “Fortunately, many of the resources still described only in the Manuscript Card Catalog are so well known …that even researchers who have never been here can track us down fairly easily, especially in the Web era. If someone, for example, were to Google “Israel Shipman Pelton Lord,” the searcher is led to the book and [the] introduction points a reader in turn to us.” --Source withheldEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 6
    • The olden days: Pre-1983 Libraries surveyed: 275 Rate of response: 61% (169) Five membership organizations • Association of Research Libraries • Canadian Association of Research Libraries • Independent Research Libraries Association • Oberlin Group • RLG PartnershipEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 7
    • The olden days: Metamorphosis to EAD The McDougall correspondence, recently cataloged in MARC within the parent archival collection. Alexander McDougall papers, 1756-1795 (bulk 1776-1782). Edition/Format: Archival material : English Summary: Correspondence and papers, 1756-1795. Most of the collection dates from the Revolutionary War, and includes muster rolls, pay rolls, and morning reports, as well as correspondence, accounts, and miscellaneous papers. The material pertains to such matters as the activities of the Sons of Liberty and Committees of Correspondence in New York … --partial record from Worldcat.orgEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 8
    • National Union Catalog of Manuscript Collections (NUCMC) • Library of Congress • First “union catalog” of mss/archival materials • Any library/archive could contribute • Publication history • 1959-ongoing • Printed volumes, 1959-1985 • RLG Union Catalog, 1983-2006 • WorldCat,1993-ongoing • Record structure • Remarkably like a library catalog record … • Contributors are now only those who can’t do for themselvesEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 9
    • NUCMC • Library of Congress • First “union catalog” of mss/archival materials • Any library/archive could contribute • Publication history • 1959-ongoing • Printed volumes, 1959-1985 • RLG Union Catalog, 1986-1993 • WorldCat,1993-ongoing • Record structure • Remarkably like a library catalog record … • Contributors are now only those who can’t do for themselvesEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 10
    • NUCMCEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 11
    • National Information Standards Task Force (NISTF) Society of American Archivists, 1977 “Examine the issues surrounding … which national information system (automated or not) to support. The two most likely candidates were NUCMC and the NHPRCs National Guide Project. NISTF … [focused] its energies on creating the preconditions for archival information exchange.” --from SAA GlossaryEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 12
    • Catalog Record Structure: MARC-AMC • NISTF recommended development of an archival component of MARC based on common data elements identified by NISTF • Tip of the hat to Elaine Engst, Cornell • MARC-AMC launched in 1983 • So, what was MARC-AMC? • A format for finding aids! • A format for authority records! • A format for “catalog records”? (Um, wait, librarians make those, not archivists …) • Central role played by RLG • Where was OCLC? (d.o.a.)EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 13
    • Content rules: Archives, Personal Papers and Manuscripts (APPM) • First content standard (“cataloging rules”) for archives and manuscripts (i.e., AACR2 equivalent), 1983 • Author: Steve Hensen, Manuscripts Division, LC • Developed simultaneously with MARC-AMC • A bow to library cataloging, but many specifics for archives/manuscripts, such as: • Archival finding aid is “chief source of information,” but the the record describes the collection • No brackets for supplied data • Dates as part of title • Numerous narrative notes for context and description (matched in MARC-AMC)EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 14
    • Finding aid structure Encoded Archival Description (EAD)EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 15
    • Encoded Archival Description (EAD) First data structure for archival finding aids • Data elements determined and defined • Hierarchical relationships among elements • Originally written in SGML, soon converted to XML • Good crosswalking with MARC, DC, ISAD(G) • Widely adopted internationally (U.S., U.K., Europe, Australia) Who owns it? • Society of American Archivists • Library of Congress maintains website with all documentation • EAD Working Group has international membershipEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 16
    • Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Development timeline • Began as UC Berkeley research project led by Daniel Pitti, 1993 • Commitment to develop community standard, 1994 • Mellon Research Fellowship at Univ of Michigan, 1995 • Version 1.0, 1998 • SAA EAD working group established, 1998 • Adopted as SAA standard, 1999 • Version 2002 • Schema published, 2011 Some continuing criticisms • Too complicated • Doesn’t improve discovery • HTML is good enough • No authorities componentEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 17
    • EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 18
    • EAD: Basic structure and semantics <ead> <eadheader> describes the finding aid itself <frontmatter> material for formally publishing finding aid <archdesc> the description of the archival unit </ead>EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 19
    • EAD: Basic elements of description <did> brief description of unit <abstract> <container> <langmaterial> <matspec> <note> <origination> <physdesc> <repository> <unitdate> <unitid> <unitloc> <unittitle>EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 20
    • EAD: Selected free-text elements <archdesc> … <accessrestrict> <accruals> <acqinfo> <arrangement> <bioghist> <prefercite> <relatedmaterials> <repository> <scopecontent>EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 21
    • EAD: Formal access points <controlaccess> <corpname> <famname> <geogname> <function> <occupation> <persname> <subject> <genreform> <title>EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 22
    • Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Some characteristics of archival finding aids that complicate effective discovery • Lack of authority control of headings • Names: too many names, too little time • Subjects: controlled-access terms often lacking • Description of materials at widely varying levels • E.g., “Correspondence, A-F” Revision (currently underway) • Increase granularity? Or decrease it? • Eliminate little-used elements and other features? • Contact: <michael.rush@yale.edu>EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 23
    • EAD-based discovery systemsEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 24
    • EAD-based discovery systemsEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 25
    • New content standard: Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS) • Published in 2004 to replace APPM • Core concept: Multi-level description • Intended for archival materials in any format • Used in the U.S. only; our national standard • Fully compatible with ISAD-G (international standard archival description) • Minor changes to APPM data elements • Matches EAD elements where relevant • Output-independent: MARC, EAD, &c.EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 26
    • “Bibliographic records” + authority records = a catalogEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 27
    • EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 28
    • Encoded Archival Content (EAC-CPF) • Standard for encoding archival authority records for corporate, personal, and family names • Authorized name heading and biographical/historical context for the entity • Enables more economical description (DACS/EAD) • Foundation for cooperative archival authority control and system (EAD + EAC) • Developed and maintained by an international working group under auspices of Society of American Archivists • Website and schemas hosted by StaatsbibliothekZu BerlinEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 29
    • EAC design principles (selected) • Archival context information [describes] circumstances under which records … have been created and used … includes identification and characteristics of the persons, organizations, and families who have been the creators, users, or subjects of records, as well as the relationships amongst them. • … is not metadata that describes other information resources, but information that describes entities that are part of the environment in which [materials] have existed. • … also can have value as an independent information resource. • … has traditionally been embedded in catalog records, finding aids, and other archival descriptive tools. • The model supports the linking of descriptions of contextual entities to digital or other surrogate representations of those entities. Excerpted from: Toronto archival context meeting, 2001 http://www.library.yale.edu/eac/torontotenets.htmEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 30
    • Encoded Archival Context (EAC-CPF) • Not just names: context of creation and use • Links to resources created by the entity, and about the entity • Collections (represented by EAD finding aids) • Bibliographic resources, etc. • Preceded addition of new fields to MARC authorities format in RDA context • Associated place • Field of activity • Affiliation • Occupation • GenderEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 31
    • Types of EAC record • SINGLE IDENTITY: one person (or corporate body or family) with a single identity represented in one EAC-CPF instance. (Most common) • MULTIPLE IDENTITY-MANY IN ONE: two or more identities (including official identities) with each represented by distinct descriptions within one EAC-CPF instance. (Less common though not rare). • MULTIPLE IDENTITY-ONE IN MANY: two or more identities (including official identities) each represented in two or more interrelated EAC-CPF instances. (Less common though not rare). • COLLABORATIVE IDENTITY: a single identity shared by two or more persons (e.g. a shared pseudonym used in creation of a collaborative work). Use Multiple Identity-One in Many. (Rare). --Excerpted from EAC Tag Library, 2010EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 32
    • EAC in action: Trove and People AustraliaEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 33
    • Authoritative form of name Other forms of name Persistent Identifier (public, persistent and citable) Biographies/Description Related resources from Trove Note EAC structure!EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 34
    • EAC prototyping project: SNACEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 35
    • What is SNAC? • Research and demonstration project funded by NEH • Three partner organizations • Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities, University of Virginia • School of Information, UC Berkeley • California Digital Library • Develop tools for extracting EAC-CPF records from existing data (EAD finding aids/collection guides) • Build a large test corpus of EAC-CPF records • Create a prototype biographical resource and access system using those recordsEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 36
    • SNAC prototype http://socialarchive.iath.virginia.edu/xtf/searchEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 37
    • SNAC record: J. Robert OppenheimerEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 38
    • EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 39
    • National Archival Database of Sweden (EAD + EAC) • NAD is based on international archival standards • for archival creators • ISAAR(CPF)—International Standard Archival Authority Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families • EAC—Encoded Archival Context • for archival descriptions • ISAD(G)—General International Standard Archival Description • EAD—Encoded Archival Description • The NAD pages contain rules and guidelines for the application of these international standards with regard to Swedish descriptive traditions. The rules for creating records for persons and corporate bodies have been developed in cooperation with the National Library. XML schemas have been developed which define the subsets of EAC and EAC which are supported by the system and control the use of Swedish archival terms (xml.ra.se/EAC/). --Source: http://nad.ra.se/static/back_eng.htmlEAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 40
    • EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 41
    • Thank you! Jackie Dooley dooleyj@oclc.org Special thanks to Daniel Pitti, Jennifer Schaffner, Brian Tingle, and Adrian Turner for letting me pilfer from their slides.EAD and the evolution of standards for archival description, CO-ASIS&T, 18 October 2011 42