1. Digital Asset Management for All? Visualising a Flexible DAMS Solution for Small and Medium Scale Institutions Paul Bevan Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru – The National Library of Wales paul.bevan@llgc.org.uk

2. Background NLW Fedora Project: NLW Fedora Project: 1 Full Time Developer 1 Full Time Developer 7 Members of Implementation Group 7 Members of Implementation Group 13 Members of Oversight Group 13 Members of Oversight Group ~£xx,xxx Cost ~£xx,xxx Cost Not a viable resource commitment for Small and Medium Sized Institutions. Not a viable resource commitment for Small and Medium Sized Institutions. Why should NLW care? Why should NLW care? Enabling Welsh (& other) Institutions Enabling Welsh (& other) Institutions Increasing likelihood of cultural information in digital form lasting Increasing likelihood of cultural information in digital form lasting A common environment for digital objects of Welsh importance? A common environment for digital objects of Welsh importance? Overlapping Needs Overlapping Needs Desire for interoperability Desire for interoperability Increased community = increased stability for Fedora Increased community = increased stability for Fedora Why not? Why not?

3. Why Fedora? Open Clear Development Priorities (funded until 2007) (Growing) Community Commercial Interest Long term sustainability? Architectural Flexibility Disseminator based access Referenced/Managed Content provides for varying storage solutions.

4. Common Needs More and more, information is being created, stored and accessed digitally. The ease of sharing these digital objects is equalled only by their fragility. Anyone with digital objects needs to store and provide access to them over the long term, i.e.: Ingest objects in many different formats as required. Collect enough metadata to identify & preserve the objects Ensure the integrity of objects held in the repository Refresh, Repackage, Replicate and Transform information as required Serve objects to (authorised) users in an format that is accessible at the time

5. Problems Initial set up costs Cost of support and development Interoperability Standards awareness & compliance (OAIS, TDR, PREMIS, OAI-PMH, METS etc) Obduracy & preservation costs Access & rights needs

6. Pathways Hurry Up! Push forward with digitisation and digital object collection programmes Implement a DAMS solution Implement a functional Ingest workflow Collect metadata that seems appropriate Create/source disseminators for required file types Build up skills required for future preservation tasks Wait and See… Continue with small scale digital projects which are served from ‘non-managed’ solutions (eg. Static websites) Create only necessary metadata, not specific preservation metadata Provide objects in ‘original’ format (not access format) Costly Potential for ‘wrong choices’ Internal policy changes Long term investment in human and IT resources Cheap (for now…) Requires much effort on the part of the user Potential for going back over completed work to collect metadata (will this get done?) No integrity or provenance information Large shift in policy and practice in the future

7. Pathways Collaborate Work with other similar institutions in order to share knowledge, resources & costs Implement open source solutions and share own developments as open source Use short-term funded projects to expand on existing solutions or create new ones which are flexible enough to be expanded upon by others Work together to increase awareness in funding bodies

8. Example: ELATED Developed at the Associated Colleges of the South ( consortium of 16 private liberal arts colleges and universities) Stated goals are to: support the use of the Fedora Repository System in small liberal arts colleges by offering a friendly, easy-to-use web interface that requires no development or programming resources implement minimalist content models for general-purpose use not to compete with Fedora in the area of key services, but to offer interfaces to Fedora services wherever possible Complete workflow for the ingestion of digital objects along with Dublin Core metadata and the creation of collections of those objects

9. Example: ELATED Screen shot of workflow Screen shot of workflowworkflow stores digital objects in Fedora repository stores digital objects in Fedora repository supports Dublin Core metadata entry and searching supports Dublin Core metadata entry and searching supports custom metadata by collection supports custom metadata by collection automatically generates previews for image files automatically generates previews for image files supports compound digital objects supports compound digital objects permits shared collections with a simple editorial workflow (not- approved/approved) permits shared collections with a simple editorial workflow (not- approved/approved) supports indexing and searching of object contents (e.g. the text inside a Microsoft Word or PDF document) supports indexing and searching of object contents (e.g. the text inside a Microsoft Word or PDF document) allows for user feedback, enabled by collection allows for user feedback, enabled by collection allows for selection and import of existing Fedora objects into Elated collections allows for selection and import of existing Fedora objects into Elated collections

10. Example: ELATED Enabler; packages Fedora into a simple to install, easy to use, package. Retains much of the flexibility of Fedora ‘Running Start’ for the institutions involved Initiated by small concerted project (Software Engineering Internship) Open Source http://elated.sourceforge.net/

11. What is Possible ? Housekeeping (Virus Check, Checksum, etc) Automation of Metadata (as possible) Creation of Formats for Storage / Acces s Life Cycle Management (Error Checking etc) Storage Management (e.g. Backup) Retain Accessibility Rights Management ‘Common Format’ provision Web Access Link From Catalogue System

12. Gaps Technical: Fedora is, at present, a solid ‘core’ which requires enhancing by institutions: Hardware & System Costs Client Ingest Mechanisms (e.g. Web Based Deposit & Validation) Automatic Metadata Extraction Disseminators Branding for Web Interface Experience Sharing of knowledge between those who have and those who wish to Community of practice Funding For initial set up costs For training and development For preservation tasks For ongoing data management tasks Resource requirements are likely to increase along with the multiplying number of digital objects

13. ‘Total Cost of Ownership’ Long term support for the life cycle management of digital objects: ‘Total Cost of Ownership’ Linden et al (2005) http://www.dpconline.org/docs/dpctw04-03.pdf

14. Gaps Technical: Fedora is, at present, a solid ‘core’ which requires enhancing by institutions: Hardware & System Costs Client Ingest Mechanisms (e.g. Web Based Deposit & Validation) Automatic Metadata Extraction Disseminators Branding for Web Interface Experience Sharing of knowledge between those who have and those who wish to Community of practice Funding For initial set up costs For training and development For preservation tasks For ongoing data management tasks Resource requirements are likely to increase along with the number of digital objects

15. Building Bridges Making use of existing resources: PRONOM, JHOVE, HANDLE Making use of existing software: ELATED, VALET, (FIRE Client) Explore disseminator resources Be part of a wide community of collaboration Requires a focal point for developments beyond the core system

16. Questions? paul.bevan@llgc.org.uk