Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Preservation isn't pretty. (but you need it) Kevin L. De Vorsey  November 24th, 2009
NLNZ includes: The National Library (a depository library) The Alexander Turnbull Library  (a research  library ) Material...
What you are creating:
What we see: You watch movies, listen to audio, and read digitised books but we look at in terms of properties, not content.
The preservation view:
There are plenty of risks! Icebergs? Theft? Fire? Volcano?  Chuds? Earthquakes?
Publishing Delivery Search tool Technical Analysts Permanent Repository Deposit NL & ATL Staff Preservation  Manager  Pres...
Another type of risk: obsolescence <ul><li>We define format obsolescence in relation to the Library’s ability to render fi...
How can we assess the risk of format obsolescence? The majority of work in this area has focused on format sustainability.
Sustainability Factors <ul><li>Open standards  </li></ul><ul><li>Ubiquity  </li></ul><ul><li>Stability  </li></ul><ul><li>...
Looks good, what’s the problem? <ul><li>Glad you asked! The problem is that there is no empirical data to help institution...
Compounding the problem:
NLNZ definition of obsolescence <ul><li>We define format obsolescence in relation to the Library’s ability to render files...
How can we measure it? <ul><li>In order to gauge risks we must know </li></ul><ul><li>exactly  what is represented in our ...
Is there a role for sustainability?
Format sustainability
Thank You! Kevin L. De Vorsey [email_address]
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Kevin De Vorsey - Preservation isn't pretty (but you need it)

613 views

Published on

Digital Preservation and Continuity Forum

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Kevin De Vorsey - Preservation isn't pretty (but you need it)

  1. 1. Preservation isn't pretty. (but you need it) Kevin L. De Vorsey November 24th, 2009
  2. 2. NLNZ includes: The National Library (a depository library) The Alexander Turnbull Library (a research library ) Material is collected regardless of format based on its value in documenting New Zealand’s heritage. The challenge: permanent access
  3. 3. What you are creating:
  4. 4. What we see: You watch movies, listen to audio, and read digitised books but we look at in terms of properties, not content.
  5. 5. The preservation view:
  6. 6. There are plenty of risks! Icebergs? Theft? Fire? Volcano? Chuds? Earthquakes?
  7. 7. Publishing Delivery Search tool Technical Analysts Permanent Repository Deposit NL & ATL Staff Preservation Manager Preservation Management Deposit UI Back-Office UI Staging Web Deposit INDIGO Web Curator Tool System Administrators But we can address some directly: Preservation Analysts NZ’s Publishers, Authors, & Artists Researchers, and the public
  8. 8. Another type of risk: obsolescence <ul><li>We define format obsolescence in relation to the Library’s ability to render files within the repository. </li></ul><ul><li>If we cannot view, render, or migrate formats then they are “at-risk”. </li></ul>‘ Risk is about the impending loss of the means of providing access ’ Pearson & Webb, ‘Defining File Format Obsolescence’, IJDC 1:3, 2008
  9. 9. How can we assess the risk of format obsolescence? The majority of work in this area has focused on format sustainability.
  10. 10. Sustainability Factors <ul><li>Open standards </li></ul><ul><li>Ubiquity </li></ul><ul><li>Stability </li></ul><ul><li>Metadata Support </li></ul><ul><li>Feature Set </li></ul><ul><li>Interoperability </li></ul><ul><li>Viability </li></ul>There is general agreement about what they include: <ul><li>Disclosure </li></ul><ul><li>Adoption </li></ul><ul><li>Transparency </li></ul><ul><li>Self-documentation </li></ul><ul><li>External dependencies </li></ul><ul><li>Impact of patents </li></ul><ul><li>Technical protection </li></ul><ul><li>Openess </li></ul><ul><li>Adoption </li></ul><ul><li>Complexity </li></ul><ul><li>Technical protection </li></ul><ul><li>Self-Documentation </li></ul><ul><li>Robustness </li></ul><ul><li>Dependencies </li></ul>or or TNA LC KB
  11. 11. Looks good, what’s the problem? <ul><li>Glad you asked! The problem is that there is no empirical data to help institutions leverage this information. </li></ul><ul><li>Does ubiquity trump openness? </li></ul><ul><li>What if patent claims pop up unexpectedly </li></ul><ul><li>(think i4i's against Microsoft, it could hit Open Office as well) </li></ul><ul><li>Does everyone agree on rankings? </li></ul><ul><li>What to do? What to do? </li></ul>
  12. 12. Compounding the problem:
  13. 13. NLNZ definition of obsolescence <ul><li>We define format obsolescence in relation to the Library’s ability to render files within the repository. </li></ul><ul><li>If we cannot view, render, or migrate formats then they are “at-risk”. </li></ul>‘ Risk is about the impending loss of the means of providing access ’ Pearson & Webb, ‘Defining File Format Obsolescence’, IJDC 1:3, 2008
  14. 14. How can we measure it? <ul><li>In order to gauge risks we must know </li></ul><ul><li>exactly what is represented in our </li></ul><ul><li>repository. </li></ul><ul><li>What format do files purport to be encoded in? </li></ul><ul><li>How closely to this format do they conform ? </li></ul><ul><li>Of all of the properties that the format could support, which are actually present in each file? </li></ul>
  15. 15. Is there a role for sustainability?
  16. 16. Format sustainability
  17. 17. Thank You! Kevin L. De Vorsey [email_address]

×