1995 National Preservation Office Conference
Guidelines for the
Management of Electronic Records, Documents and Publications: a Towards
Federation 2001 (TF2001) Progress Report
Paper presented by Keith Parrott, Convenor, TF2001 Management of Material in Electronic Format Working Party at the 2nd National Preservation Office Conference: Multimedia Preservation - Capturing the Rainbow, in Brisbane, 28-30 November 1995.
In March 1992 the National Library of Australia sponsored a national conference on access to Australia's recorded documentary heritage - "Towards Federation 2001: Linking Australians with their Heritage".
The conference looked at the broad range of Australian documentary materials recognising that the material and its preservation were not the sole concern of any one institution. The conference sought cooperation between institutions to establish and agree on initiatives and mechanisms that will enable Australians to have the best possible access to their recorded documentary heritage by the year 2001. The year 2001 was chosen as it is the centenary year of the Australian federation.
The conference considered issues such as:
- collecting
- bibliographic access
- physical access
- breaking down political barriers
- the problems and opportunities of the electronic world
- copyright, and
- linking of the aboriginal community, multicultural communities and people with disabilities to their heritage.
Out of the conference came 86 resolutions. A meeting to review the progress of the resolutions was held in December 1993. Out of that meeting came the resolution RG5 from the Preservation Session:
That the Australian Archives, the Australian Council of Libraries and Information Services (ACLIS), the National Preservation Office and the National Film and Sound Archive establish a working party to develop guidelines for the management of material in electronic format, building on work already done by the Australian Archives and the ACLIS Task Force on the Preservation of Australian Electronic Information.
Australian Archives was subsequently assigned carriage of the resolution. The TF2001 Management of Material in Electronic Format Working Party then met for the first time on 3 November 1994.
An early initiative of the Working Party was to invite the Nation Museum of Australia to participate as a member of the Working Party, as was, later, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.
The principal aim of the TF2001 Working Party is to link institutional preservation and access policies for electronic information through the development of a guideline for the management of material in electronic format. This undertaking is in an environment of constant technological change where information is held and accessed in diverse formats involving a wide range of hardware and software technology. Those involved with the preservation of electronic information operate in environments that vary from ones which are reasonably controlled such as those associated with government administration through to environments addressed by collecting institutions who have no direct influence on how electronic information is created, managed, accessed and preserved until the works are in their custody.
One preservation related initiative that came to the attention of the Working Group early in 1995 was the activity of the combined Task Force of the US Commission on Preservation and Access, and the Research Libraries Group. This Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information noted that:
Continued access indefinitely into the future of records stored in digital form cannot, under present circumstances be guaranteed within acceptable limits. Although loss of data associated with deterioration of storage media is an important consideration, the main issue is that software and hardware technology becomes rapidly obsolescent. Storage media becomes obsolete as do devices capable of reading such media; and old formats and standards give way to newer formats and standards. This situation holds both for electronic records derived through conversion from some analogue form (paper, film, video, sound etc), and for records that originated in electronic form.
Similar issues had been identified by the Australian Archives in its publication Managing Electronic Records: a Shared Responsibility. The Australian Archives proposes that as technology changes over time, records of enduring value need to be migrated. The emphasis is on keeping records accessible using the technology of the day by preserving the evidentiary aspects of content, context and structure rather than attempting to preserve the physical characteristics of records.
The US Task Force set out to look at electronic information preservation through the "refreshing" of stored records by copying records onto newer media and into newer formats. They saw that while this approach is simple in concepts it raises a number of issues which were not necessarily just technical.
As the US Task Force was planning to release an interim report by May 1995, with the final report to be completed in the US summer of 1995, the TF2001 Working Party felt the timing was right to consider the work of the US Task Force, examine the issues identified in light of Australian circumstances, and provide feedback to the US Task Force.
A report from the US Task Force was made available for comment in September 1995. The TF2001 Working Party provided comments to the US Task Force that focussed on the common underlying principles upon which the report is based and which are reflected in the recommendations.
These principles are:
- All citizens have a fundamental right to continued and appropriate access to digital information.
- The responsibility for preservation lies fundamentally with the creator.
- The consequences of this responsibility require the support of a nationally coordinated system.
- A fail-safe mechanism is necessary.
- Selection/appraisal will still be essential in a digital environment.
- Migration, not refreshing, of digital information will be the appropriate strategy.
- Commercial concerns should not dominate selection/retention decisions.
- There are different categories of creators.
- The rights of creators, providers, users and the community need to be
- protected.
- Continuing research and assessment of progress and developments is essential.
- Action can and should be taken now on those areas where we can identify appropriate strategies.
The TF2001 Working Party found the draft US Task Force report to be an excellent first step in highlighting the complexities of the issues and in providing a focus for further discussion and action. In the comments we made we referenced the situation in Australia when appropriate.
Principle 1 - Right of Access
-
The TF2001 Working Party strongly supports this principle and in Australia this right has recently been affirmed in a National Preservation and Conservation Policy for Movable Cultural Heritage and through the development of a National Database for Moveable Cultural Heritage (AMIS - Australian Museum Information System) launched at the Museum Conference prior to this National Preservation Office conference.
Principle 2 - Creator's Responsibility
- It is our belief that the creator has the primary but not the
fundamental preservation responsibility. The concept of primary responsibility
sits more comfortably with the need to invoke a 'fail-safe' mechanism or of
some other mechanism to capture information if the creator is unable or
unwilling to do so.
Acceptance of this principle does not preclude the pursuit of custodial strategies or safeguard mechanisms by collecting institutions. Many creators will not or cannot maintain their information long-term, nor can the community force them to. It is important to remember that libraries and those archives with a collecting role, rather than an internal archiving role, are not in the same position as conventional archives who can use organisational rules to insist on creators within the organisation maintaining their own records and information.
Principle 3 - Need for National Coordination
- We strongly support this principle and would like to see it
strengthened. There is a need not only for national but international
coordination and this is not mentioned in the US Task Force Report. The role of
new stakeholders is critical and the Task Force is to be applauded for
recognising this. Acceptance of preservation responsibility by new trustees of
digital cultural heritage is one way of making immediate progress and needs to
be encouraged. However, the role of collecting institutions other than
libraries and archives is not mentioned in the report.
The US Task Force report makes scant reference to the existing cooperative ventures which already exist. In Australia there are a number of cooperative activities within the library sector where the distributed nature of collections and preservation responsibilities is acknowledged. There is also growing recognition that all cultural heritage sectors need to collaborate.
Principle 4 - Fail Safe Mechanism
- We believe that the concept of a fail-safe mechanism as described in
the US Task Force report is neither practical nor logical. It assumes that
there is knowledge of the existence and impending demise of digital
information. It also implies that those who have accepted preservation
responsibilities cannot be trusted. The report is vague in making the link
between creators, and those who have accepted fail-safe responsibilities.
The fail-safe approach is essentially punitive. We prefer a 'safeguard' mechanism which places greater emphasis on cooperation between all stakeholders. While recognising that this approach may arise from the proposals in the 'Best Practices' recommendations of the US Task Force report we believe that the need for active intervention at the creation stage, the need for metadata and standards, and the desirability of forming alliances with systems designers should have been given greater prominence in the report.
Instead of creating new systems of linked archives armed with a fail-safe mechanism we prefer to strengthen our existing cooperative and coordination structures. We accept that the concept of fail-safe may form part of the preservation strategy, but it should not be the principal strategy.
Principle 5 - Selection/Appraisal
- In deciding that the issue of selection was 'out of scope' for the
study the Task Force has omitted basic advice on this critical issue. We
believe that there is no reason why the same basic rules which govern selection
in a non-digital world cannot be applied to digital information.
In Australia we have national consensus on the concept of a Distributed National Collection where agreements regarding collecting and preservation responsibilities are made. There is also an increasing awareness that the issue of significance must be addressed.
The work which has been undertaken in the UNESCO Memory of the World programme in identifying criteria for significance should be relevant to any discussion on this topic.
Principle 6 - Migration
- We agree with the principle that migration is a more realistic strategy than refreshing but would like more emphasis to be placed upon the need to maintain the integrity of information. It is also recognised that this will be difficult with multimedia products.
Principle 7 - Commercial Influence
- We support the view expressed in the US Task Force report that commercial concerns should not dominate selection or retention decisions to the detriment of the public interest. We wondered therefore if Recommendation 2, which suggests holding an open competition to advance digital archives, may not contradict this principle.
Principle 8 - Different Types of Creators
- The US Task Force report's division of creators into three broad
categories: individual, business/organisation and publisher describe the
situation in the non-digital world. This division does not recognise that in a
networked environment there is considerable overlap between the three
categories and that anyone can be a publisher.
The facility with which everyone can become a publisher produces particular problems for the strategies proposed in the US Task Force report. All creators will not be in a position to accept a preservation responsibility. In addition all publishers will not be aware of the need to make known the existence of their publication, thus jeopardising the fail-safe mechanism. Failure to recognise this fundamental difference between the digital and print environment has resulted in the omission of what we believe to be a key component of the current situation.
Although the US Task Force report acknowledges that there are different types of digital information, it does not appear to recognise that these different categories of digital information are likely to require different preservation/management strategies.
Principle 9 - Rights of Creators, Providers, Users, and Community
- We support this principle and agree that appropriate legislation
will be required in each country. We also think that it is worth emphasising
that at present not all barriers are technological ones.
Principle 10 - Research
- This principle is strongly supported. We applaud the activities
which are already under way in the US. We would also wish to see efforts
devoted to the coordination on an international scale of research activities.
It is important to identify the types of digital information for which appropriate preservation strategies can be identified now and those types which require research.
Principle 11 - Action
- We strongly support the need for immediate action. Even if we do not
yet have all the answers, we should commence the implementation of flexible
strategies which permit and encourage the incorporation of lessons learnt from
future research and experience.
With the last point in mind the TF2001 Working Party has engaged a consultant to assist us in the development of guidelines for the management of material in electronic format. We currently have funding for the first phase which should establish a foundation for the guidelines and we will seek funding for further phases to test the guidelines' practical implementation. The current consultancy will assist the TF2001 Working Party:
- Survey and analyse current Australian projects on the management of material in electronic format
- Survey and analyse electronic record management and preservation literature and analyse the results of the US Task Force on the Archiving of Digital Information
- Develop a model and guidelines for the management of material in electronic format
- Publish and promote findings.
The focus of the work of the TF2001 Working Party is on preservation through management of all forms of electronic information in the Australian context. To reflect the preservation roots of the Working Party it has now changed its name to the TF2001 Preservation of Australian Digital Information Working Party (TF2001 PADI Working Party).
To end on a practical note I would like to propose a model that reflects our current thinking of preservation through management:
The 3-M Preservation Cycle - Materials/Management/Migration Materials
Select materials appropriate to the work. The choice of hardware and software for the development of a work will greatly influence strategies for its preservation and future access. If the work is for short term consumption then the use of obscure technology is most probably not an issue unless there is an intention to encourage wide-spread access and distribution. The greatest ally for long term preservation and access is the use of materials that confirm to recognised, long lasting standards. Standards, however, cannot be relied on. For there to be any reasonable chance of work's survival it must be managed and migrated.
Management
The greatest threat in the preservation of multimedia works is that software components will get lost or corrupted and that necessary specialised hardware components will be removed or become incompatible. The elements that comprise work and the links between these elements need to be identified, recorded and maintained over time. Versions of hardware and software need to be tracked and decisions made when it is necessary to migrate to new versions. A good management strategy is to encourage access, and to widely distribute your work. Works that are frequently accessed have a greater probability of survival.
Migration
Migration of works to current technology can be expensive. However if works are being created using products that have wide acceptance and conform to recognised, long lasting standards then migration should be reasonably straight forward without requiring the use of additional software or hardware. The main challenge with migration is identifying the appropriate time when to migrate. Timing is dependent on the trade-off between effort/cost against ease of migration/functionality. Migration will inevitably result in some loss of functionality or corruption of the work.
The alternative to migration is obsolescence and inability to gain access. For a discussion of the migration issue see the Australian Archives publication Managing electronic records: a shared responsibility.
Last updated 27 February 1998
| About This Site | Copyright | Privacy | Accessibility | Site Map | Site Search | Content A-Z | Contact Us |