eCommons

 

Plenary II: Certification

Permanent URI for this collection

Session Moderator: Nancy McGovern, Assistant Research Scientist, Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research, Institute for Social research, University of Michigan.

Browse

Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item
    Preservation Pressure Points: Evaluating Diverse Evidence for Risk Management
    Ross, Seamus; McHugh, Andrew (2006-10-27T16:42:15Z)
    Preservation Pressure Points: Evaluating Diverse Evidence for Risk Management -- Establishing a comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness and trustworthiness of a digital repository requires a broad range of evidence. Preservation can be considered as a complex spatial and chronological network of challenges, and associated risks. For example the organisational, financial, technological and operational contexts within which a repository resides and the extent to which it is capable of managing them must be ascertained if an audit is to be able to assert the likelihood of the institution's success. Significant effort must be directed towards the definition of methodologies for identifying appropriate classes of evidence, to their evaluation, and to the attaching of weight to them. Formal means are required to facilitate the analysis and comparison of disparate evidence types in order to enable auditors to accommodate a diverse range of physical, testimonial and experiment-based proof. In addition to binary systems of inquiry (e.g., does the organisation have a mission statement?) auditors must display an ability to distinguish the most persuasive examples from those that provide less substantive evidence of organisational competence. Similarly, if, for instance, a significant proportion of staff reveal that they have no idea of the content of their organisation's mission statement then this must be reflected in the overall organisational assessment. A comprehensive insight, and consequent decision, can only be reached after fully exploring the evidential basis upon which compliance is to be founded. This discussion of evidential appraisal techniques for repository audit reflects the series of pilot audits undertaken by the Digital Curation Centre within a selection of UK data centres and archives, including the Beazley Archive and the British Atmospheric Data Centre.
  • Item
    The nestor Catalogue of Criteria for Trusted Digital Repository Evaluation and Certification
    Dobratz, Susanne; Schoger, Astrid; Strathmann, Stefan (2006-10-27T16:32:34Z)
    The Criteria for Trusted Digital Long-Term Preservation Repositories ( urn: nbn:de:0008-2006060710 or http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/series/nestor-materialien/2006-8/PDF/8.pdf ) have been developed by the nestor project and are now open for public comment. This criteria catalogue primarily addresses cultural heritage organizations, federal archives, libraries and museums and is designed as a guideline for the planning and setup of a digital long-term preservation repository. Secondarily, this catalogue can be an orientation guide for software developers, third party vendors or service provides from the private sector. The nestor catalugue focuses on its applicability in Germany . Still, it must be discussed internationally and should adhere to international standards.
  • Item
    Audit and Certification of Digital Repositories: Exposing Risk and Fostering Collaboration
    Dale, Robin (2006-10-27T16:28:37Z)
    Over the last three years, the RLG - NARA Task for on Digital Repository certification has worked to develop a checklist which would allow objective evaluation of digital repositories and archives. The checklist was based upon international standards and community best practices for digital preservation as well as influences from information technology and information security standards. The goal was to develop metrics to evaluate three aspects influencing repository trustworthiness: the characteristics of the archiving organization that affect performance, accountability, and business continuity; technologies and technical infrastructure employed by the repository; and finally the processes and procedures utilized by the repository. A draft checklist was released for public consumption and comment in August 2005, leading to further development. In addition, the checklist has been leveraged by the Center for Research Libraries Auditing and Certification of Digital Archives project and used in test audits of three digital repositories and archives. Through public comment, practical application, and other CRL project activities, we have made further progress toward the development of a fully-fledged program of audit & certification for digital repositories. This presentation will discuss checklist development, envisioned uses of the checklist, the emerging audit & certification process, potential audit & certification process outputs, and compliance issues.
https://ecommons.cornell.edu/collections/f7ecfd43-7cf1-4974-8980-4b924a347585
ecommons.cornell.edu
CC-MAIN-2024-22
513866
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:M4ECHKSQMBO7LQCHBSTQFRBV4XDH42CC
<urn:uuid:be83b07f-1013-43db-b336-2bb51a151dd6>
2024-05-24T23:07:23Z
44.213.159.11
text/html
sha1:Y57IDFCZEXF4TBCLLGMKTULTYCYMH27Q
<urn:uuid:10c13818-ef36-4e54-ba66-2e826ae81a1a>
https://ecommons.cornell.edu/collections/f7ecfd43-7cf1-4974-8980-4b924a347585
response
<urn:uuid:aff7cbae-a722-4b18-9716-5820917565e3>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2024-22
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for May 2024
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-28
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.5-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/