1. Preservation Strategies in the North Carolina Geospatial Data Archiving Project (NCGDAP) NCSU Libraries Steve Morris Head of Digital Library Initiatives Digital Preservation in State Government: Best Practices Exchange 2006

2. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 2 Overview Digital geospatial data preservation issues Technical solutions Organizational/cultural solutions

3. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 3 NC Geospatial Data Archiving Project Partnership between university library (NCSU) and state agency (NCCGIA), with Library of Congress under the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP) One of 8 initial NDIIPP partnerships (only state project) Focus on state and local geospatial content in North Carolina (state demonstration) Tied to NC OneMap initiative, which provides for seamless access to data, metadata, and inventories Objective: engage existing state/federal geospatial data infrastructures in preservation

4. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 4 Targeted Content Resource Types GIS “vector” data Digital orthophotography Digital maps Tabular data Content Producers Mostly state, local, regional Some university, commercial Selected local federal projects

5. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 5 Today’s geospatial data as tomorrow’s cultural heritage Future uses of data are difficult to anticipate (as with Sanborn Maps).

6. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 6 Risks to Digital Geospatial Data Producer focus on current data Time-versioned content generally not archives Future support of data formats in question Vast range of data formats in use--complex Shift to “streaming data” for access Archives have been a by-product of providing access Preservation metadata requirements Descriptive, administrative, technical, DRM Geodatabases Complex functionality

7. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 7 Different Ways to Approach Preservation Technical solutions: How do we preserve acquired content over the long term? Cultural/Organizational solutions: How do we make the data more preservable—and more prone to be preserved—at point of production?

8. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 8 Vector Data Format Options Option A: use an open format and have a really unfortunate transformation and limited vendor support for the output object Option B: use closed format but retain the original content and count on short- and medium-term vendor support. Option C: do both to buy time and look for an open, ASCII solution. (watch GML activity) No sweet spot, just an evolving and changing mix of flawed options that are used in combination.

9. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 9 Preserving Cartographic Representation Counterpart to the map is not just the dataset but also models, symbolization, classification, annotation, etc.

10. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 10 Preserving Geodatabases Spatial databases in general vs. ESRI Geodatabase “format” Not just data layers and attributes—also topology, annotation, relationships, behaviors Growing use of geodatabases by municipal, county agencies Some looking to Geodatabase as archive platform (in addition to feature class export) ESRI Geodatabase archiving approaches Feature Class Export, XML Export, Geodatabase History, File Geodatabase, Geodatabase Replication

11. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 11 Harnessing Geospatial Web Services Image atlases from WMS services? Capturing cartographic representation? Recording records from decisions-making processes? Later: data transfer via WFS & GML?, Other?

12. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 12 Interest in how geospatial content interacts with widely available digital repository software Focus on salient, domain-specific issues Challenge: remain repository agnostic Avoid “imprinting” on repository software environment Preservation package should not be the same as the ingest object of the first environment Tension between exploiting repository software features vs. becoming software dependent Project Repository Approach

13. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 13 Organizational/Cultural Approaches Take the data as is, in the manner in which it can be obtained Provide feedback to producer organizations/ inform state geospatial infrastructure “Wrangle” and archive data Note the ‘Project’ in ‘North Carolina Geospatial Data Archiving Project’– the process, the learning experience, and the engagement with industry and infrastructure are more important than the archive

14. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 14 Framework data communities Snapshot frequency, naming schemes, classification, GML application schemas, format strategies Metadata standards and outreach Persistent identifiers, versioning, feedback on metadata quality Content replication/transfer For data improvement projects, disaster preparedness, aggregation by regional service providers, … and archives Where does archiving and preservation fit in? Points of Engagement with Spatial Data Infrastructure

15. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 15 Geography Markup Language (GML) for archiving (PDF/A version of GML?) GeoDRM Adding preservation use cases Content Packaging Will there be an industry solution? Web Map Context Documents Can we save data state as well as application state? Content Replication Is this a layer in the overall architecture? Persistent Identifiers Points of Engagement with the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)

16. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 16 Software vendors Better support for temporal data management Tools for retrospective data conversion Web mashup and open source communities WMS caching schemes Standard tiling schemes with temporal component? Data vendors Cultivate market for older data (scaled pricing?) Tech transfer on archiving practices? Points of Engagement with Industry

17. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 17 Project Status Cultivating a market for older data.

18. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 18 Project Status Cultivating tools for retrospective conversion.

19. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 19 Geospatial data is complex, introducing manifold challenges to ingest processes and repository development Vector data and spatial databases are especially complex Geospatial data exists in very large quantities and is subject to frequent update Need to engage industry in the solution Need to engage point of production Conclusion

20. Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 20 Questions? Contact: Steve Morris Head, Digital Library Initiatives NCSU Libraries Steven_Morris@ncsu.edu Web site: http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/ncgdap/