Contents:
- 1. Executive summary
- 2. Introduction
- 3. Definitions of digital preservation
- 4. Trustworthy repositories and file authenticity
- 5. Standardisation model OAIS
- 6. How to get started
- 7. Bit preservation and logical preservation
- 8. Introduction to recommended file formats and containers
- 9. Methods for preservation
- 10. Preservation planning
- 12. Checksums
- 13. Persistent identifiers
- Glossary
- References
- Annex I – Digital Preservation Capability Performance Metrics
- Annex II – File formats and codec suitability for Web and presentation
- Annex III – Manual for metadata extraction
- Annex IV – Example of a metadata schema with PREMIS
These guidelines provide a basic introduction to relevant strategies, planning tools, file formats, codecs and metadata standards needed for making a well-founded preservation plan for digital material. It provides responses to the main problems encountered by choosing specific strategies, and guidelines to help identify problems and potential solutions associated with digital materials of different kinds. It covers the preservation of digital materials such as text, images and video and are intended to be used by participants of the Digitising Contemporary Art (DCA) project. It does not take into account how data can be presented or reinstalled in an exhibition context or art related matter. Neither does it address the preservation of a more complex character such as software or Internet based data. It begins by defining some important digital preservation terminology, explains the concepts of trustworthiness and authenticity and goes on to introduce the Open Archival Information System (OAIS) model, presenting the elements of digital preservation and workflow with examples of how it can be used for the DCA project. An explanation of the Digital Preservation Capability Model follows, including how a collecting institution uses it to assess how well it is doing; it also provides references to areas in the guidelines that aid areas with ‘low scores’ from an assessment. The differences between codecs and containers as well as uncompressed, lossy compression and lossless compression are explained and recommended file formats for texts, images, audio and video are provided. It then goes on to explain different preservation strategies (migration, emulation, etc), including associated ‘issues and risks’, explains the role of preservation metadata and finishes with the topics of checksums and persistent identifiers. The different elements of digital preservation are explained in a basic and accessible way that is not too technical. Together with some examples from real life situations and recommendations for practical tools, the guidelines provide the basics needed for collection managers to create a suitable preservation policy and plan. It is recommended to use this deliverable in conjunction with D6.2 Best practices for a digital storage infrastructure for the long-term preservation of digital files.
As the authors explain in the introduction, their aim is to provide “in a basic and accessible way, that is not too technical”, all the most important issues an institution needs to know about digital preservation. In this they succeed. It includes an interesting explanation of why digitized analogue material and born digital material differ in their preservation needs and why digitizing artwork requires more than simply preserving the information (such as with a text object). It also emphasizes the importance of sustainability in digital preservation: the need for budget, proper staffing and a long-term commitment. It offers concrete examples and justification for choices made, admitting realistically that the ‘ideal’ preservation norm cannot always be met. It rightfully emphasizes that when compromises are made (and that is more the norm than the exception), it is alright as long as the reasoning behind it is well documented by the institution. It presents one of the clearest explanations of the OAIS model currently available. Introducing the Digital Preservation Capability Maturity Model as a tool “to get started” is very helpful and relatively unique in a best practices document like this. Lots of clear definitions of the most important terms on the subject makes it very practical. The main literature reference section is quite extensive. Although the original target audience for this deliverable were participants in the DCA project, it is definitely useful for smaller and medium sized institutions about to undertake digitization and digital preservation tasks that may not have a team of digital preservation experts on board.