Beyond the Repository:IntegratingLocalPreservationSystemswith

NationalDistributionServices

LAURAALAGNALAURA.ALAGNA@NORTHWESTERN.EDU

@DIGITIZED_LAURA

LG-72-16-0135-16

Beyond the Repository:Goals

• Investigatecommonproblemsindigitalobjectcuration,versioning,andinteroperabilitybetweenlocalrepositoriesanddistributedpreservationsystems

• Identifybroadlyapplicableusecasesanddesignpatterns

• Proposehigh-leveltechnicalsolutions

Beyond the Repository:People and institutions

Northwestern UniversityEvviva Weinraub (PI)CarolynCaizziLauraAlagnaBrendanQuinnGinaPetersen

University ofCalifornia SanDiegoSibylSchaefer

AdvisoryBoardMikeGiarlo (Stanford)BertLyons(AVPreserve)MaryMolinaro (DPN)MikeRitter(UniversityofMaryland)JustinSimpson(Artefactual)DavidWilcox(Fedora/DuraSpace)AndrewWoods(Fedora/DuraSpace)

Beyond the Repository:Research questions

• Howdoesonecurateobjectstoingestintoalong-termdarkpreservationsystem?

• Howdoesversioningofobjectsandmetadataplayoutinlong-termdarkpreservationsystemsandhowtoautomatetheseactions?

• Howcansystemsthatstoredatadifferentlybemademoreinteroperable?

Beyond the Repository:Methodology

1.Gatherinformationonthefirsttworesearchquestionsviaasurveyofpractitioners

a.Understandthebreadthofimplementedlocalsystemsb.Identifylocalworkaroundsandmetadatafixesinplacetoaddresstheseissuesc.Gatherdataaboutlocalpreferencesaroundversioningd.Identificationofpreservationpoliciesandrightsissues

2.Holdaseriesofin-depthinterviewstogatheradditionalqualitativeinformation3.Usingthisdata,workwiththeAdvisoryBoardtodesignhigh-levelrequirementsforincreasedinteroperabilitybetweenlocalanddistributedsystems4.Disseminatefindings

Preliminary results:survey metrics

• 170validresponses

• 65%havecollected10TBormore

• Morethan80%expectedtheircontenttogrowbyatleast10TBinthecomingyear

• Widegeographicdistributionrepresented,including15internationalresponses

• Mostlyacademiclibraries(77%)

• 73peoplewerewillingtodiscussfurtherwithus

Survey results:Systems used

Survey results:Distributed storage & number of copies

• Respondentswhoreportednotkeepingmultiplecopiescitedfundingasthemostcommonbarrier

• 85%ofrespondentsreportedkeepingmultiplecopiesinmultiplelocations

• Ofthese,thevastmajoritykeepthreecopies

2

3

4

5

6

7+

Survey results:Where copies of data are stored

Survey results:How copies are tracked

Automatic

Don’t keep track

Homegrown tool

IT support does it

MetaArchive Conspectus

Spreadsheet, database, or other manual method

Survey results:Versioning & curatorial decisions

Whenversioningdistributedcopies:• 85%ofrespondentsreportedkeepingallversions

• 20%reportedonlykeepingthenewestversion

• 20%wereunsure• Manyindicatedthatversioningpracticesaredependentonthetypeofmaterials

Intermsofselection:• 48%ofrespondentssaytheyselectasubsetofmaterialstogotoadistributedrepository

• Thetoptwoselectioncriteriaforthesematerialswere:

• Mandate(legal,grant,orother)

• Intrinsicvalue

Survey results:What is lacking in current tools and services

Survey results:What is lacking in current tools and services

Systems are too specializedSystems not well-integratedContent tracking and reporting

Preservation metadata/eventsMigration/versioning support

Scalability

Technology requires too much expertise

Automation

Survey results:What is lacking in current tools and services

It’s not the technology, it’s how we use it

Support for multiple content types

Fixity

Nothing is lacking

Storage options

Access control/rights statements

Technology requires too much staff time

Next steps

July/August: Interviews

August: Interviewanalysis

September/October: Reportwriting

October: Advisoryboardmeeting

December: Reportdissemination

Thank you

LG-72-16-0135-16