Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

PREMIS: To Be or Not To Be in My METS The Preservation Journey at the University of Connecticut Libraries ALA Annual 2013 ALCTS PARS Intellectual Access.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "PREMIS: To Be or Not To Be in My METS The Preservation Journey at the University of Connecticut Libraries ALA Annual 2013 ALCTS PARS Intellectual Access."— Presentation transcript:

1 PREMIS: To Be or Not To Be in My METS The Preservation Journey at the University of Connecticut Libraries ALA Annual 2013 ALCTS PARS Intellectual Access to Preservation Metadata

2 Digital Preservation “Digital preservation combines  Policies  Strategies, and  Actions that ensure access to digital content over time.” --ALA/ALCTS/PARS Short DefinitionALA/ALCTS/PARS Short Definition

3 TRAC & PREMIS  Policies:  Compliance (if not certification) with TRAC/CCSDS M-1 (“Magenta Book”)  Requires set of policies  Strategies:  Fixity checking:  “ : The repository shall actively monitor the integrity of AIPs.”  Remotely replicated copies  Actions:  Fixity checking, at ingest and over time  Record fixity “hashes” or “message digests” in PREMIS  Replace fixity failures with good copies

4 Current Landscape  Currently The University of Connecticut Libraries relies on a number of solutions that incorporate various “levels” of preservation  CONTENTdm  Digital Commons  Archivists’ Toolkit  Archivematica  UCL’s AMFS (Archival Master File Service)  In 2011, a new team, the Second Generation Digital Library Services Working Group (2G), was created to investigate alternatives to these solutions that incorporated a more consistent preservation mission over all its solutions for its digital collections.

5 Timeline of Events for 2G Fall 2011 Creation of the Second Generation Digital Library Services Working Group Initial Questions on Metadata Spring & Summer 2012 Metadata Standards & Normalization Metadata & Our Content Model: Where Does Metadata Live? Fall 2012 Islandora Role of Metadata & Islandora METS Profile Registration Spring & Summer 2013 Playing with metadata Re-conceptualize Islandora as a presentation layer Fall 2013 & Beyond Investigations into Handling PREMIS Events, RDF & Linked Open Data

6 Fall 2011  In the search for alternatives to our current solutions, selected Fedora Digital Repository  Began investigating ingest scenarios  How will content creators submit content and associated metadata?  How will metadata be structured and organized? Will content and metadata be in shareable formats and/or proprietary?  Where do content and associated metadata live in Fedora?  Do we work with SIPs and what would these SIPs look like?  Do we follow others and rely on METS? How do we use METS?

7 Spring & Summer 2012  UCL’s Content Model (CM) for Fedora  Needed to decide whether to “lump” or “split” our architecture  Decision was made to “split” our content model into 3 different levels of related Fedora Digital Objects  Grouping Object Level that acts as the highest level to group like objects  Container Object Level refers to the type of a specific resource, such as an image vs a letter  Media Object Level contains the actual digital content such as the jpg or pdf  UCL’s CM, Metadata and Content  Our “atomistic” CM means a more “atomistic” approach to metadata  Metadata can live at any of our 3 different levels (or metadata can live as a data stream in any Fedora Digital Object at the grouping, container, or media object level.)  Metadata Standards and Normalization (METS)  We wanted the ability to process a variety of metadata (technical, descriptive, preservation, administrative, structural) at ingest, we needed a way to “normalize” ingested metadata in order to create and/or update data streams in the appropriate Fedora Digital Objects  We chose METS

8 Fall 2012  METS, aka the Uberset  What is the Uberset?  The role of the METS Uberset file  Our ideal role for metadata and in particular preservation metadata  Islandora  Seen early on as an administrative model and presentation layer for our Fedora Digital Repository

9 Spring & Summer 2013  Development of the METS Uberset file  What are the minimal requirements for metadata?  How do these minimal requirements for across 3 different levels of related Fedora Digital Objects?  What is the role of METSRights in relation to the other rights statements in the descriptive metadata?  What do we do with the technical metadata?  Where do we get our initial PREMIS data and where does that go in the METS Uberset file?

10 Spring & Summer 2013 Issues Encountered  Development of Islandora  Encountered conflicting content models  Decision to use Islandora as a presentation layer but not as an administrative model  Metadata in the METS Uberset file  Problem with the technical metadata from Archivematica  Inconsistent  Problem with PREMIS as it was transformed from METS Uberset file to a data stream  Logical loop created  Other issues with METS Uberset files  Workarounds solutions to problems above necessitated that METS Uberset files be re-written over several times  Large METS Uberset files which caused transformation problems and slow transformation times  Too much repetition in METS Uberset files

11 Summer 2013  Decision to move away from the METS Uberset File as a tool to create and/or update data streams  From metadata “lumpers” to “splitters”  Notion of Metadata “Modules” as  Flexible  Re-usable  Interoperable  Ability to add directly into FOXML and Fedora data streams  Unique specifications (best practices, standards, policies, forms, etc.)  Parts that can be packaged a number of different ways including as our METS Uberset file if needed

12 Fall 2013 & Our Next Steps  Refine specifications for metadata modules  Descriptive metadata (Simple Dublin Core, MODS for now)  Rights metadata (METSRights for now)  Administrative metadata (Fedora)  Structural metadata (Fedora, rels-ext, rels-int)  Technical metadata (Via FITS)  Preservation metadata (Normalized from Technical metadata with the one event, “ingest” for now)  Investigate how to handle PREMIS beyond the ingest event  Investigate RDF and Linked Open Data

13 Thank you  Jennifer Eustis   David Lowe 


Download ppt "PREMIS: To Be or Not To Be in My METS The Preservation Journey at the University of Connecticut Libraries ALA Annual 2013 ALCTS PARS Intellectual Access."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google