Format Agnostic Archival Processing: Using One Standard for All

Kari May

Abstract


Pooling guidance and examples from nationally and internationally known groups including the Digital Preservation Coalition, University of California Libraries, and OCLC, this article supports processing archival assets with a format agnostic perspective to promote a unified standard for all materials. Format agnostic processing can embrace and align digital and physical assets under one expectation for basic outputs regardless of their formats. In mixed material collections, digital assets are frequently seen as requiring a disassociated set of tools and knowledge and approached as unconnected to the physical assets. The format agnostic perspective can eliminate the tendency toward varying levels of processing and differing descriptions standards complicating the discovery of collection materials due to the varying formats of its assets. It can also support timely processing and preservation of digital assets to decrease the risk of data loss. Format agnostic processing would enhance discoverability while minimizing the loss of digital information.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Appraisal. (n.d.). In Dictionary of Archives Terminology. Retrieved November 30, 2021, from dictionary.archivists.org/entry/appraisal.html

Arroyo-Ramirez, E., Dundon, K., & Peltzman, S. (2021, March 16). Works in progress webinar: Holistic approaches to born-digital appraisal and accessioning—Revising the UC guidelines for efficient archival processing. www.oclc.org/research/events/2021/031621-holistic-approaches-born-digital-appraisal-accessioning.html

Chen, S. (2001, March). The paradox of digital preservation. Computer, 34(3), 24–28.

Dundon, K., McPhee, L., Arroyo-Ramirez, E., Beiser, J., Dean, C., Eagle Yun, A., Jones, J., Liebhaber, Z., Macquarie, C., Michels, L., Peltzman, S., & Phillips, L. (2020). Guidelines for efficient archival processing in the University of California Libraries (Version 4). UCLA: Library. escholarship.org/uc/item/4b81g01z

Engebretson, J. (2018). Data, data, everywhere. Baylor Arts & Sciences, Fall 2018. blogs.baylor.edu/artsandsciences/2018/10/30/datascience

Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives. (2002). Electronic records: Introduction. Commonwealth of Kentucky. kdla.ky.gov/records/recmgmtguidance/Pages/elecrecmgmt.aspx

Marshall, J.M. (2020). The modern memory hole: Cyberethics unchained. Athenaeum Review, Winter 2020(3), 94–101.

Preservation issues. (2015). In Digital Preservation Handbook (2nd ed.). Digital Preservation Coalition. www.dpconline.org/handbook/digital-preservation/preservation-issues

Preservation methods and techniques. (n.d.). In Dictionary of Archives Terminology. Retrieved November 30, 2021, from dictionary.archivists.org/entry/preservation-methods-and-techniques.html

The BitList 2021: Portable media. (2021). Digital Preservation Coalition. www.dpconline.org/digipres/champion-digital-preservation/bit-list/portable-media

The BitList 2021: The global list of digitally endangered species. (2021). Digital Preservation Coalition. www.dpconline.org/digipres/champion-digital-preservation/bit-list

The three essentials of digital preservation part 1: File storage. (2018). Sustainable Heritage Network. sustainableheritagenetwork.org/system/files/atoms/file/The_Three_Essentials_of_Digital_Preservation_Part1_File_Storage.pdf

Weber, C.S. (2020, April 28). Time estimation for processing born-digital collections. Hanging Together: The OCLC Research Blog. hangingtogether.org/time-estimation-for-processing-born-digital-collections




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/palrap.2022.269



Copyright (c) 2022 Kari Leigh May

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.