DLF Wiki - User contributions [en]

NDSA:January 25, 2016 Standards & Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:55Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== Call-in information ==
* Phone call-in information: 202-750-4186, no pin is needed
* Web browser: visit www.uberconference.com/clir-dlf

== Discussion, Kate and Andrea - last call as co-chairs, S&P for the future. ==
* The topic will be a broad discussion about future directions for the group. Andrea and Kate are stepping down as co-chairs. If you would like to play a larger role in the WG consider volunteering to be a co-chair.
* Meg is currently making personal contacts with call regulars to encourage folks to consider chairing.
** Meg on Coordinating Committee
** Concerned about lack of co-chairs for S&P at this critical junction; some tasks for chairs for this cycle have lagged due to lack (ex: meeting invitations to calendars)
** Has been making personal phone calls to some S&P regulars; some decisions still outstanding
** Interested folks are encouraged to volunteer.
* Interim coordination - What might S&P look like for the next few months?
** Meg – people providing conference or meeting reports/recaps.
* Notes that at a DH conference they use the term “preservation” differently than we might – how do we reach out to this community?
* Reports from ALA?
** Mariella – archiving of email collections – ePADD, ePADD 2 project; access rights, etc. Who else is dealing with these issues?
*** National Archives is dealing with these issues
*** Archiving email symposium last spring. Kate working with Harvard and Stanford, etc. looking at lifecycle of email records for identification of gaps in tools.
*** Presentation at SAA in August relevant.
*** Erin – Videos from the email series from last spring will be linked as soon as links are available
*** Mariella - Appraisal and preservation both interesting aspects of the overall email challenge
*** Meg – Best Practices Exchange (BPE) a good place for finding email resources. Email a very fluid space. Harrisburg BPE showcase of email techniques, using NLP and other automated methods for appraisal and access rights management.
*** Dorothy Waugh at Emory might be a god contact for Mariella
** Meg – international projects – Persist project cites NDSA work.
*** Winston – Charles Beagarie (?) wanting to build bridges between his work and ours.
** Kate - Preservation of social media
*** Meg – Nat Archives focused on policy
* Action teams instead of WG?
** Meg favors present WG structure so that we might maintain community.
** Bethany has not heard from Coordinating Committee any concrete proposal for change. Has the sense this would be a titular change only. An “ interest group” might allow for more casual relationships, allowing for “action groups” or “working groups” to precipitate out of interest groups as needed.

== Wrap-up ==
* Meg – proposes:
** We commit to Feb meeting as a recap of current conferences and meetings (iPRES, ALA midwinter, AHA, CNI, DLF, CurateGear, upcoming 2/23 Boston NDSR Un-Conference)
** At end of call coordinate the email discussion for the meetings following
** Hope for a chair by then.
* Next call – 2/29/2016, 1 pm ET.

NDSA:December 21, 2015 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:55Z

Dlfadm: 4 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== Participants ==
* Andrea Goethals (notes)
* Amy Kirchoff
* Bethany Nowviskie
* Carol Kussman
* Erin Engle
* Felicity Dykas
* Jenny Mullins
* John Spencer
* Karen Cariani
* Kate Murray
* Meg Phillips
* Michelle Paolillo
* Oliver Bendorf
* Winston Atkins

== Meet Those New to the Group ==
* Bethany Nowviskie, Director of DLF since April 2015
* Oliver Bendorf, Program Associate, DLF since August 2015

== Update on the NDSA Transition to DLF Hosting (Bethany, Oliver, Erin) ==
* Independent NDSA website in development - will launch in January 2016
* Listserv in transition - will launch in January 2016
* Working group calls will use DLF's uber conference account - will be set up by January 2016
* DLF has started planning for the annual NDSA meeting which will be hooked onto the DLF forum in early November 2016
* The wiki is being transitioned over - should be ready the first week of January 2016 - will have the same look and feel

== Report out on the CNI Panel Discussion ('''NDSA on the Move''', Bethany and Oliver) ==
* Summary of the panel
** Representatives from the Coordinating Committee (Micah, Robin, Abby) talked about why DLF was chosen
** Bethany and Oliver from DLF talked about why they answered the call
* Summary of the feedback at CNI:
** A terrain map of how DLF, CLIR, NDSA and others fit together is needed
** People want ot know how to get more involved with the NDSA WGs
** People have preferred the practical NDSA products over the theoretical

== Discussion of Standards and Practices WG for Feedback for DLF ==
* What WG things have you liked?
** Several people said the Levels of Preservation and Fixity report
** Knowing that we all have the same issues
** Cross-WG activities
** Collaborative nature of the group
** Want to continue to try to collaborate with commercial companies
* Any feedback on the monthly calls? Should they be monthly or scheduled as needed to work on projects?
** Several people said that they liked having monthly calls. One reason given is that it provides a beneficial pressure to get things done.
** Several liked the showcases (e.g. speakers on video, digital art, email)
** A couple people thought the WG would benefit from adding agenda planning meetings a few times a year to brainstorm topics, which would also take some of the burden off the co-chairs
** We have occasionally had 'what are you working on' calls when we did not have agendas but we could make this a more programmatic part of the WG agenda. These calls also lead to us hearing from those that don't always speak up
** Would like to introduce icebreaker calls periodically to the WG, e.g. what is currently keeping you up at night?
* What did not work?
** When we have had sub-groups (e.g. for video or email) it is too hard to participate in the discussion (yet another list to follow) - these should come back together with the main WG
** Some of our projects have been too large, or too small (nothing produced from them). The medium-sized projects have worked well for the WG but it may not be possible to predict this in advance.
** There is value in the conversation even if nothing is produced from it
* What do people think about the Coordinating Committee's idea to recast the WGs as interest groups?
** One person said that interest groups might be good - this person said she has lost sight of what this WG does

== Wrap-up ==
* Reminder that there is a call for new co-chairs. Please contact Erin, Kate or Andrea if you are interested or want to nominate someone (with their consent).
* Next call TBD

NDSA:December 2, 2015 Meeting Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:55Z

Dlfadm: 6 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

'''December 2 meeting notes'''

'''In attendance'''
*Oliver Bendorf
*Maureen Harlow
*Margaret Maes
*Edward McCain
*Christie Moffatt
*Abbey Potter
*Michael Stoller
*Lauren Work

Members were asked to consider the following questions in advance of the meeting:

*What activities do you get the most out of? What do you find less useful?
**Monthly discussions
**Monthly presentations
**Signal blog posts
**Contributing the National Agenda for Digital Stewardship Contributing to web archiving survey Reading the wiki Face to face collaboration
**Opportunity to work on projects with other members Sharing my own work and projects Etc.

*What content related issues would you like to see the CWG bring up or cover that it hasn't?

*What groups or projects should the CWG reach out to?

*What are your questions for DLF and the Library of Congress during the transition?

'''Feedback (please add!)'''

'''Working Group structure'''
*Discussed idea of smaller NDSA teams forming around specific topics and projects. One challenge mentioned was on how to best coordinate efforts across the organization.
*Support was expressed for cross-working group efforts (with the Standards WG on born-digital workflows, for example)

'''Activities'''
*Seemed to be good support for continuing case studies and Signal blog posts (Content Matters interview series)
*Member presentations are helpful and should continue

'''Focus'''
*Opportunity to broaden mission/rethink purpose statement
*Continue to support communities forming around subject areas (like born-digital news), but consider how this relates to the broader working group. Format/document type may be another approach to explore further.
*Reach out to the Dodging the Memory Hole group around born-digital news

'''Communication'''
*More information about the meetings would help members keep up if they miss a call
*Explore communication tools available via DLF
*Consider opening meeting minutes to a broader community
*Communicate more via listserv

NDSA:Meeting notes

2016-02-11T19:20:55Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Discussed the activities of the working group, what works well and what doesn’t, and how we might recommend the group carry forward into the future. Oliver Bendorf of DLF joined us for the discussion.

*What activities do you get the most out of? What do you find less useful?
**Monthly discussions
**Monthly presentations
**Signal blog posts
**Contributing the National Agenda for Digital Stewardship Contributing to web archiving survey Reading the wiki Face to face collaboration
**Opportunity to work on projects with other members Sharing my own work and projects Etc.

*What content related issues would you like to see the CWG bring up or cover that it hasn't?

*What groups or projects should the CWG reach out to?

*What are your questions for DLF and the Library of Congress during the transition?

Meeting Notes

NDSA:August 17, 2015 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:55Z

Dlfadm: 6 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== Link to Recording ==
Recording: [https://locosi-its.webex.com/locosi-its/lsr.php?RCID=c4d26cf5bc283fe7e1ebcbe851cc7c53 https://locosi-its.webex.com/locosi-its/lsr.php?RCID=c4d26cf5bc283fe7e1ebcbe851cc7c53]

== Participants ==
* Adi Alter
* Andrea Goethals (notes)
* Amy Kirchoff
* Ben Peterson
* Carol Kussman
* Carolyn Cox
* Dianne Dietrich
* Erin Engle
* Euan Cochrane
* Felicity Dykas
* John Spencer
* Kate Murray
* Kathleen O'Neill
* Kelcy Shepherd
* Kevin DeVorsey
* Linda Tadic
* Martin Kong
* Mary Vardigan
* Max Eckard
* Midge Coates
* Nicole Contaxis
* Paula DeStefano

== Meet Those New to the Group ==
* Kathleen O'Neill (LC)
* Martin Kong (Chicago State Univ., in Infrastructure WG)

== Announcements and Updates ==
# Video survey update - the blog post should go up in early September. The survey data will be published on the NDSA Dataverse site
# There will be an announcement in the next few weeks from the Coordinating Committee on the next NDSA host
# Our iPRES poster was accepted. There's still time to join the group working on it (email Erin).
# At iPRES there will be a reception hosted by DPN on Wed. evening Nov. 4. At that reception there will be recognition of the NDSA Innovation awardees.

== Special Presenter: Euan Cochrane, Digital Preservation Manager at Yale University Library ==
'''Presentation: "Emulation and Virtualization for Digital Preservation and Access" '''

Listen to recording for presentation, starting around the 5:30 mark

Recording: [https://locosi-its.webex.com/locosi-its/lsr.php?RCID=c4d26cf5bc283fe7e1ebcbe851cc7c53 https://locosi-its.webex.com/locosi-its/lsr.php?RCID=c4d26cf5bc283fe7e1ebcbe851cc7c53]

'''Q&A Afterwards:'''

Q1. I haven't heard of people talk about using emulation for archived email. Have you done any work on this or are you starting to explore it?

A1. I have opened a PST in an emulated Outlook but haven't tried to show it within the context of the whole email account which would be interesting. With email there are some issues - the appraisal of it and the scale of it.

Q2. What are your current biggest challenges in taking this to the next step?

A2. One thing that is needed and being worked on and not necessarily a challenge is adding an authentication layer on top of the EaaS. Some of the biggest challenges are having access to the software and the legal right to use it, and funding the ongoing maintenance of the emulators.

Q3. Are there issues scaling this, for example to all born-digital content?

A3. There are different things that need to scale - one is the technology. A low-hanging fruit would be to set up emulators for all the old word processing formats.

Q4. Can you say more about emulation and redaction? At what scale can you redact (file level, sub-file)?

A5. You can redact at the level of a file by deleting files from a disk and re-saving it as a derivative image. Or you could do something similar by removing parts of a file. One solution might be using BitCurator to filter the content and redact pieces and then using emulation on the redacted version. Derivative images don't take much room.

== Wrap-up ==
The next call is September 21 from 1-2 ET. The agenda may include an update on the new NDSA host. The call will be on the theme of web archiving - recent conferences, current projects, etc. If you would like to be a presenter conteact Andrea, Erin or Kate.

NDSA:Chronopolis DPN Overview for NDSA IWG.pdf

2016-02-11T19:20:54Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:Tuesday, July 28, 2015

2016-02-11T19:20:54Z

Dlfadm: 9 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== Agenda ==
#Update on new NDSA host
#Overview of Chronopolis and The Digital Preservation Network (DPN)
#Request topics for future calls / repository walk-throughs
#Call for white paper topics

==In attendance:==
(Please edit your name and affiliation if you like)

#Sibyl Schaefer, University of California, San Diego
#Erin Engle, Library of Congress
#Abby Potter, Library of Congress
#Nick Krabbenhoeft, Educopia Institute

==Discussion:==
#Update on new NDSA host
##Interviews with potential hosts are underway. They are coordinated by Micah Altman and an advisory council.
##The working groups with active projects and agendas will likely be untouched. The outreach working group may be reinvigorated and new groups may be added. The coordinating committee prefers that the working groups continued to be defined from the bottom up.
#Overview of Chronopolis and The Digital Preservation Network (DPN) [[NDSA:Media:Chronopolis_DPN_Overview_for_NDSA_IWG.pdf|Slides]]
##Chronopolis is a a collaborative service hosted by the University of California San Diego Libraries, University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies (UMIACS), and National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Development, hardware, and administrative responsibilities are each delegated to a partner. It provides storage for an annual fee.
##Chronopolis is a partner of DPN, a distributed dark archive to provide a repository-of-last-resort. Storage is paid by membership fees that fund an endowment.
##Chronopolis is also partnering with Duracloud and DPN to provide a front-end interface for moving data into its network called Duracloud Vault, which bridges Duracloud Storage with 3 nodes in DPN through an entry point in Chronopolis.
#Request topics for future calls / repository walk-throughs
##Sibyl and Nick are in the process of creating a new agenda for the working group this year. Suggestions should be sent to the mailing list or [mailto:sschaefer@ucsd.edu Sibyl] and [mailto:nick@codedculture.org Nick]
#Call for white paper topics
##The working group is prepared to publish the white paper on repository migrations started earlier this year and is looking for a new topic to research and develop into a white paper. Suggestions should be sent to the mailing list or [mailto:sschaefer@ucsd.edu Sibyl] and [mailto:nick@codedculture.org Nick]

NDSA:July 20, 2015 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:54Z

Dlfadm: 10 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== Announcements and Project Updates ==
*iPres poster accepted that discusses the work of the group. Will work on layout and details in coming months.
*NDSA will have a reception at iPres, which is also where the Innovation Awards will be presented.
*Video Deep Dive project – will have an upcoming blog post after Erin gets the draft to the working group to review.
*Email Archiving Symposium: A small working group is updating a chart that originated with Harvard that visually displays the capability of different tools that work with emails and how/where actionable during the life cycle. They are updating this to add in the digital curation life cycle as well as background information on the tools - things like how complicated are the tools, what operating system is required, set up... This new version would then be added to something like COPTR. The goal is to have this out before SAA. If you want to be added to the email list for the email group, contact Kate.

== Update on New NDSA Hosting ==
*5 letters of interest from 5 institutions. The coordinating committee looked at these this morning and plan to interview interested institutions over the next two weeks and make a recommendation by Mid-August. The Coordinating Committee is trying to figure out how working groups can contribute to this process.

== Today's Topic of Discussion: Upcoming Conference Presentations / What Are You Working On ==
*Kate Murray: Presenting at IASA (http://www.2015.iasa-web.org/) with Chris Lacinak and Carl Fleischhauer on Performance of Analog-to-Digital Converters for Sound: Revisiting the Performance Methods and Metrics (FADGI Project). This project builds on work dating back to 2011 when began looking at metrics and saw the possible need to modify the metrics/benchmarks. Tests have been run with various equipment on the metrics/benchmarks from which the results are being used to make recommendations in final reports. Other documentation has come out of the project from using a $25,000 machine and a $600 machine. Ask Kate for more details on the standards and original reports. Two of the projects reports can be found here: http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/guidelines/digitize-audioperf.html

*Andrea Goethals: Will be presenting with Joey Heinen at iPres on Developing a Framework for File Format Migrations. This is based on a paper Joey did as the NDSA resident at Harvard. In general, it was known that formats needed to be migrated, but instead of focusing on one format to another, Joey developed the Migration Framework which consists of 5 general steps (each with their own tasks and deliverables) to work through for migrating any format to another. A case study was done using Kodak Photo CDs as well as Real Audio files. Documentation on the Kodak CD process is included in the paper. Some examples of generic steps include:
**Format analysis: what issues might need to be addressed for each format involved to ensure content remains the same after migration (ie. unique color spaces or compression)
**Content grouping: determine how many different groups are necessary to get the best results for each format type. Each group may go through a different process.
**Migration environment: Determine what tools are needed for migration, what environment is needed... etc.
**Stakeholder chart: documenting who plays what role

*Mariella Soprano: Has been working to form a Digital Preservation Strategy Group to assist with working with DPN. The Archives and Special Collections have a lot of materials in audio or video formats with only a single copy as well as materials on hard drives that have not been transferred to a server yet. These materials will be key candidates for utilizing DPN, however there is a lot of work to be done prior to ingest. Islandora has been adopted as the management system.

*Amy Kirchhoff: Focus for Portico has been to assist with collection management for libraries. Interested in how present data back to institutions. They have been working on the back end to better analyze data as well as addressing the audit interface to help institutions make their efforts for collection management easier.

== Upcoming Meetings ==
*August 17: Emulation and Emulation as a service
*Sept/Oct: Topic - Web Archiving
*After a new host is selected, there will probably been an information session about that. Stay tuned.

NDSA:Tuesday, June 30, 2015

2016-02-11T19:20:54Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Infrastructure WG
Wednesday, June 30, 2015 2:00 pm, Eastern Daylight Time (New York, GMT-04:00)

----

==Agenda==
# Presentation from Ben Fino-Radin, Museum of Modern Art
# Updates

==In attendance:==
(Please edit your name and affiliation if you like)

#Max Eckard, Bentley Historical Library
#Dallas Pillen, Bentley-UM
#Abbey Potter, Library of Congress
#Emily Reynolds, IMLS
#Dave Rice,
#Nick Krabbenhoeft, Educopia
#Erin Engle, Library of Congress
#Karen Cariani, WGBH
#Andrew Berger, Computer History Museum

==Discussion:==

*MoMA Infrastructure - Ben Fino-Radin presented on the MoMA digital infrastructure
**MoMA is based around Archivematica to produce AIPs for artist- and vendor-produced digital objects on an item-level.
**After months of manual ingest test, MoMA has found that automation can handle the majority of ingests.
**The increasing degree of automation has also enabled MoMA to look at optimizing their workflows for greater speed.
*Updates
**Next meeting is Tuesday, July 28th at 2pm Eastern
**The NDSA Innovation awards are still [http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/ndsa/awards.html accepting nominations]. They will be presented at iPres this year.
**Today is the last day for Letters of Interest to become the next host of the NDSA.

NDSA:Meeting Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:54Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA Meeting May 6, 2015

Attendees:
*Maureen Harlow
*Rachel Howard
*Edward McCain
*Gail McMillan
*Christie Moffatt
*Abbey Potter
*Abby Smith Rumsey
*Imogen Smith
*Lauren Work

iPRES conference (Nov. 2-6, Chapel Hill, NC) panel proposals due May 15

Ideas for proposals:
*Ed McCain suggested a panel on born-digital news preservation
*also a suggestion for a panel on work with content creators
*Gail would like to help but not attending iPRES
*email will be sent to CWG listserv to solicit additional ideas and participants

NDSA transition
*RFP issued May 1-June 30, 2015 for a planned transition to a new host by September 30, 2015.
*working groups will continue through transition
*members encouraged to share comments, concerns, suggestions for hosts, and questions
*A question was asked about any proposals received. As of May 6, only inquiries have been made.

Member news
*LC released new access interface to web archive collections
*Ed McCain shared information about a research project to assess the value/utility of born-digital news. Campus focus groups (at the University of Missouri) will followed by a survey. Ed will share updates at a later meeting.

Member presentation: Imogen Smith, Dance Heritage Coalition
*Recently received a Knight Foundation Prototype Fund Grant
*goal to provide links between born-digital performance media and related writings
*beginning with in-person outreach to producers and users of the resources
*locating and ingesting content; some content is feely available online and some are not
*diverse array of content and formats
*6 months to see what can be produced
*looking for feedback!
**Abbey Potter suggested webrecorder.io (https://webrecorder.io/) might be a useful tool to explore

Next CWG meeting will be Wednesday, June 3 at 11 a.m. EST

NDSA:Tuesday, May 26, 2015

2016-02-11T19:20:54Z

Dlfadm: 10 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Infrastructure WG
Wednesday, May 20, 2015 10:00 am, Eastern Daylight Time (New York, GMT-04:00)

----

Agenda
# Introductions
# Catch up ongoing projects
# Discuss agenda for next call
# Presentation from Max Eckard, Bentley Historical Library, University of Michigan

From Max:
The Mellon-funded Archivematica-ArchivesSpace-DSpace Workflow Integration project (we're also toying with Archival Integration Project, or AIP--get it?) seeks to expedite the ingest, description, and overall curation of digital archives by facilitating the creation and reuse of descriptive and administrative metadata among Archivematica and ArchivesSpace and streamlining the deposit of fully processed content into our digital preservation repository built on DSpace.
We're a little over a year into this two-year process. During our talk, we'll give a brief overview of our institutional context before discussing project goals and the progress we've made so far.

You could also point attendees to this press release [https://record.umich.edu/articles/bentley-receives-mellon-foundation-grant-develop-digital-archives-workflow] and this blog post [http://archival-integration.blogspot.com/2015/04/hello-world.html] for more information.

==In attendance:==
(Please edit your name and affiliation if you like)
#Max Eckard, Bentley Historical Library
#Mike Shallcross, Bentley-UM
#Dallas Pillen, Bentley-UM
#Abbey Potter, Library of Congress
#Trevor Owens, IMLS
#Emily Reynolds, IMLS
#Euan Cochrane, Yale
#David Wilcox, DuraSpace
#Nick Krabbenhoeft, Educopia
#Ed Busch, MSU
#Linda Tadic
#Joseph Pawletko, NYU
#Karen Cariani, WGBH
#Christopher Muller
#Erin Engle, Library of Congress

==Discussion:==
*Abbey Potter is serving as interim co-chair for the IWG through the NDSA host transition which is scheduled to happen by September 30, 2015.
*If anyone is interested in taking on the other open co-chair seat, please let Abbey or Karen or Trevor know. The co-chairs work together to come up with agendas for each monthly meeting, contacting speakers, and helping the group start and complete projects. A big thank you to Karen and Trevor for leading the IWG so well for the past four years.
*The migration guidance and storage survey documents are still in the works, Abbey will follow up with Erin and Micah (respectively) to get these published.
*Trevor drafted up a set of questions [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vkFjbw3jKfqLosKwWONlILMxicjVLza5KdEEhFnhPgk/edit] around a possible ''Infrastructure Tour'' series on ''The Signal''
*Possible topics for presentations/calls in the future. Please add to this list or give it a +1 if you are eagar to see something on this topic:
**BWFLA, emulation as a service (Euan)
**AP Trust/DPN node/private LOCKKSS network (Bradley @ UVA)
**Presto Center in the Netherlands
**LC Storage Architecture summary (Jane)
**Fedora 4 (David Wilcox)
*Next meeting is Tuesday, June 30th at 2pm Eastern. Abbey will check with Sybil Schaefer to see if she still wants to do a presentation on Chronopolis.

NDSA:May 18, 2015 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:53Z

Dlfadm: 4 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== Announcements and Project Updates ==
* Archiving Email Symposium - June 2-3, 2015 at Library of Congress. Email Kate or Erin for more info.

== Today’s discussion topic: S&P Poster proposal for iPRES ==
*The main discussion topic was to have a working session on the poster proposal for iPRES2015. See the notes over on the proposal project wiki page. [http://www.loc.gov/extranet/wiki/osi/ndiip/ndsa/index.php?title=IPRES_2015_Poster_Proposal#Brainstorming_Notes_from_5.2F18_Call]

NDSA:Innovation Meeting Minutes 05-12-15

2016-02-11T19:20:53Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA Innovation Working Group Call Tuesday, May 12, 2pm-3pm ET

= In Attendance =

* Jane Mandelbaum, LC
* Erin Engle, LC
* Jefferson Bailey, Internet Archive
* Chelcie Rowell, Wake Forest
* Vika Zafrin, Boston University
* Sheila Morrissey,Ithaka
* Sumitra Duncan, Frick / NYARC
* Lauren Work (in spirit)
* Ric Ferrante - Smithsonian
* Maureen Harlow - PBS
* Hanna Sommeres - NPR
* Sheila Morrissey - Portico
* Anne Wootton - PopUp Archive
* Bailey - PopUp Archive
* Matt McInery Texas Tech
* Sumitra Duncan - NYARC
* Jon Ippoloito - U Maine

= Next Working Group Meeting =

* '''Tuesday July 14, 2-3pm ET'''

= TL;DR & Action Items =

* Add Matt to Innovation Awards committee. Emily Reynolds joined post-call.
* 2015 NDSA Innovation Awards announced today! Please nominate your colleagues, projects, future stewards and other institutions for the award. Also spread the word. Listserv announcements and a blog post to the Signal published.
* All - think of ideas for more interviews
* Thoughts for an Innovation WG iPRES2015 proposal? Suggestion to propose a digpres Q&A site workshop, similar to at DP14.

= Insights Interviews =

* Jefferson - Ian Milligan (maybe digital history macroscope and/or Dragan/Rhizome on WA tool)
* Emily - Bethany Nowviskie (from the last call)
* Lauren - AP Trust / UVA
* Chelcie - Cornell and NEH grants
* Anne and Bailey - Tanya

= Short Papers Ideas =

* Guidance on Web Archiving update by Sumitra
** 2 pages max
** drafted outline, assigned roles
** Goad to explain what web archiving is for a general audience, no jargon

* Mock Digital Disaster Planning
** Digital disaster planning was published by ALA -- buy, steal, publish something maybe?

* Jefferson is due to revisit web archiving survey

NDSA:IPRES 2015 Poster Proposal

2016-02-11T19:20:53Z

Dlfadm: 16 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== iPRES Info==

'''
iPres 2015, Nov. 2-6, Chapel Hill, NC'''
[[NDSA: http://ipres2015.org/]]

'''Guidelines for Posters and demonstrations'''
*Poster and demonstration submissions '''(abstracts of up to 2 pages)''' are encouraged for posters reporting on emerging issues or work in progress, and also for demonstrations of innovative solutions. These submissions should describe the work to be presented and its contribution beyond the state of the art. Posters and demonstrations will be presented in a dedicated session during the conference.
*All contributions will be peer-reviewed. Abstracts of accepted posters and demonstrations will be published in the iPRES 2015 proceedings.
*A best poster award will be offered.

== Important Dates ==

*June 29, 2015 - Poster and demo submissions (abstract) due
*July 13, 2015 - submitters notified
*October 1, 2015 - early bird registration closes

== Poster Team ==

*Meg Phillips, NARA
*Winston Atkins, Duke
*Martin Halbert, UNT
*Karl Jackson, US Marine Corps Band
*Carol Kussmann, UMN
*Mariella Soprano, CalTech
*Michelle Paolillo, Cornell
*Andrea Goethals, Harvard
*Kate Murray, LC
*Erin Engle, LC

== Brainstorming Notes from 4/20 Call ==

Thanks to all for the great brainstorming session for our planned Standards and Practices “In the Thicket of It” poster for iPRES. Using the graphical representation of a long-living hardwood like a bristlecone pine tree, our members names would serve as nutrients in the soil for the roots (representing aggregated membership groups such as academic libraries, government, non-profits, etc). Main trunks would represent major areas explored within our group such as standards, unique content classes, and physical media. Smaller branches off the main trunks would be specific projects – such as the PDF/A report for the standards, optical media for the physical media, software based art for content classes, etc.

Each project would list (via bullets in leaves or other easy to read display) how it came to be, what the main area of discussions were and what the outputs were (reports, discussion, blog posts, etc).

The poster name “In the Thicket of It” (which Kate just made up after the call and is by no means the final name) could refer to both the botanical representation of the data in tree form but also our main message: S&P members are active practitioners – right in the thick of it, get it? – working on moving the work forward on real world issues. We would want to showcase that the needs of the group germinate in conversations, the results of which are resources and activities that benefit not only the working group members but also the community-at-large.

== Brainstorming Notes from 5/18 Call ==
*“In the Thicket of It” – title

*Points to address in the abstract:
**Who we are: Active practitioners in the DP space
**How our projects are generated: Issues and concerns that we come across in our daily work
**How we address our work: Group comes together, consensus on working on issues, that are helpful to the larger community, not just NDSA
**What’s coming up: Show opportunities for growth and future work

*Is this grassroots effort focus in the DP or focused on NDSA S&P work?

*Examples of possible design: Bristle-cone pine (soft tree), apple or fruit tree (ripe vs not yet ripe), tree branches (buds, buds growing). Represent what we have worked on vs what has been identified

*Information to display in the design:
**Problem statement and brief statement of how we addressed it
**Lengths of projects – 2010- present
**Title, URL, date
**More background information “in the soil” – last month we thought to include member institutions in the soil. Or members could be roots and soil could be info.
**Branch could list the main issue of the topic (ex. A/V), and the fruit could the project, outcome or product (ex. Video survey).
**S&P Projects – what have we done? What have we identified that we have yet to work on?

*Information to include in the abstract:
**Identify S&P projects – issues and outcomes
**Develop a narrative

*Volunteers to help with the abstract??????
**Kate Murray – first draft
**Karl Jackson
**Winston Atkins – first draft
**Carol Kussmann

*Action items:
**Kate and Winston will work on abstract and send to this group (poster team) in 10 days – June 1

== Andrea's Notes after Reviewing the Minutes ==
I went through all the call notes and found some things we can add. Some of these are projects or discussions we didn't mention yet in the abstract; others are more information to add to projects we did already mention in the abstract.

=== Projects to add ===
* A survey of the standards, metadata schemas, and formats related to digital preservation
** We didn't produce any public deliverables from this - they are only listed on our private wiki in various places and in a Google doc.
** Ultimately we ended up reshaping this project to work on the digital preservation article in Wikipedia but we put a lot of work into this and we could come back to this at some point to share it or continue to work on it
* A discussion of the packaging of content and metadata, for example BagIt, METS, MXF
** The notes for this are at http://www.loc.gov/extranet/wiki/osi/ndiip/ndsa/index.php?title=February_24,_2014_Standards_%26_Practices_Working_Group_Notes
* We actually had 2 different video-related activities:
** A discussion about video including FADGI activities on an application specification and guiding principles, institutional projects (NYU, Stanford, Harvard), and the AVPreserve perspective
** The deep dive survey (identifying the stumbling blocks in preserving video)
* Similar to video, besides the email archiving interest group, we had demos of email archiving tools

=== These aren't projects but maybe we can fit them in somewhere ===
* Our members attend a lot of different conferences and we have shared highlights from many of them: Screening the Future Conference, Digital Directions, CurateCamp, Digital Preservation, IFLA, iPRES, LC Storage Meeting, Research Data Alliance, AMIA, ICA, DLF, IASA
* Our members periodically share updates on projects they are working on outside of the NDSA. These have included the UDFR, the Academic Preservation Trust, data management guides, DPN, repository self-assessments, a Drupal-based TRAC tool and many different institutional projects.

=== More information about some of the projects ===
* For the Levels of Preservation project we can say that members made presentations about it at IS&T Archiving 2013, the 2013 NE NDSA Regional Workshop, the 2013 SAA Annual Conference, and iPRES 2013.
* For the Staffing Survey we can say that it was reused for a survey of UN members.
* An approach for implementing the OAIS Reference Model and the derived Trustworthy Repository Auditing & Certification metrics (TRAC) in a distributed digital preservation (DDP) environment. This was a joint project by the Educopia Institute and the NDSA
** More information is at http://www.loc.gov/extranet/wiki/osi/ndiip/ndsa/index.php?title=DDP_OAIS_Frameworks

=== Here are more topics we wanted to look at in the future, for our future projects section ===
* Repository certifications, especially those conducted through peer review
* Which standards are being adopted
* Preservation terms of service / SLAs
* Sustainability of our tools
* Preservation of social media

NDSA:April 20, 2015 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:53Z

Dlfadm: 7 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== Announcements and Project Updates ==
* Archiving Email Symposium - June 2-3, 2015 at Library of Congress. Email Kate or Erin for more info.
* The UNESCO PERSIST Project - NDSA was asked to provide feedback or comment the UNESCO PERSIST Project. This project is looking to hear what some countries are doing about a national approach to digital preservation and what UNESCO to do to encourage member states in the policy and practice domain. Folks interested in commenting can send comments directly from their institution. Please contact Kate or Erin for the contact email.
**http://www.unesco.org/new/en/media-services/single-view/news/persist_unesco_digital_strategy_for_information_sustainability/#.VT_NVGPVt8E

== Today’s discussion topic: S&P Poster proposal for iPRES ==
*Over the past year, we have explored different topics of interest to the group – preserving digital art, identifying challenges to preserving digital video, showcasing cataloging tools for A/V content and email preservation. Given our all of our good work this year and in past years, we thought it might be a good opportunity to take stock and showcase our project and activities.
*This year, iPres 2015 (http://ipres2015.org/) will be held in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, in early November. We’d like to take this opportunity of an international conference venue being close to home and propose a poster on the work of the NDSA Standards and Practices Working Group to iPRES.
*See draft proposal below for the outcome of the discussion.

== Next Steps ==
First deliverable is the abstract due on '''June 29, 2015'''. Please contact Kate, Andrea or Erin if you’d like to join the Poster Team.

== Draft of proposal -- post-meeting email ==

Thanks to all for the great brainstorming session for our planned Standards and Practices “In the Thicket of It” poster for iPRES. Using the graphical representation of a long-living hardwood like a bristlecone pine tree, our members names would serve as nutrients in the soil for the roots (representing aggregated membership groups such as academic libraries, government, non-profits, etc). Main trunks would represent major areas explored within our group such as standards, unique content classes, and physical media. Smaller branches off the main trunks would be specific projects – such as the PDF/A report for the standards, optical media for the physical media, software based art for content classes, etc.

Each project would list (via bullets in leaves or other easy to read display) how it came to be, what the main area of discussions were and what the outputs were (reports, discussion, blog posts, etc).

The poster name “In the Thicket of It” (which Kate just made up after the call and is by no means the final name) could refer to both the botanical representation of the data in tree form but also our main message: S&P members are active practitioners – right in the thick of it, get it? – working on moving the work forward on real world issues. We would want to showcase that the needs of the group germinate in conversations, the results of which are resources and activities that benefit not only the working group members but also the community-at-large.

NDSA:Innovation Meeting Minutes 02-10-15

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA Innovation Working Group Call Tuesday, February 10, 2pm-3pm ET

= In Attendance =

* Jane Mandelbaum, LC
* Erin Engle, LC
* Jefferson Bailey, Internet Archive
* Chelcie Rowell, Wake Forest
* Vika Zafrin, Boston University
* Sheila Morrissey,Ithaka
* Sumitra Duncan, Frick / NYARC
* Lauren Work (in spirit)

= Next Working Group Meeting =

* '''Tuesday April 14, 2-3pm ET'''

= TL;DR & Action Items =

* Erin helping out with Innovation WG (Yay!)
* Planning for NDSA Innovation Awards -- Jane and Jefferson will send out a call for volunteers for the Innovation Awards nominating committee
* All - think of ideas for more interviews
* Jefferson to write up short paper ideas for feedback/distro
* April's call will be on Disaster Planning

= Insights Interviews =

* Jefferson - Ian Milligan (maybe digital history macroscope and/or Dragan/Rhizome on WA tool)
* Emily - Bethany Nowviskie
* Lauren - AP Trust / UVA
* Jane - augmented reality person
* In works - others?

= Short Papers Ideas =

*There notes ideas are from the November call.

* Guidance on Web Archiving
** 2-3 pages max
** For a general audience, no jargon
** Summarizes current practices, current challenges, and how site owners / content creators can make sites archive friendly
** Would be something that could be handed out to site owners, legislators, and the like
** Could also be a model for basic, simple, handout-style guidance for other types of born-digital collections: born-digital personal collections, electronic records, etc
** Jefferson will write up abstract and has a couple of collaborators and will get more via ndsa-all

* Mock Digital Disaster Planning
** Maybe write up a blog post to help get feedback on framing the idea
** Pose the questions of if/why that would be useful
** Idea of coordinating with SAA's MayDay event on disaster planning (http://www2.archivists.org/initiatives/mayday-saving-our-archives) in May 2015 -- could orient delivery date around that
** Idea of working on the idea/paper/whatever at IIPC (April 2015) and at LC Storage Meeting (Fall 2015)
** Maureen will help (as possible pre-delivery) and Jane will help behind the scenes
** Jefferson will write up an abstract, but may need name not on a blog post

NDSA:Tuesday, Mar 24, 2015

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 5 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA Infrastructure Call

==In attendance:==
(Please edit your name and affiliation if you like)
#Sybil Schaffer, Rockefeller Archives
#Euan Cochrane, Yale
#Karen Cariani, WGBH
#Emily Reynolds, IMLS
#Max Eckard, Bentley Historical Library
#Leah Prescott, Georgetown law center
#David Wilcox, DuraSpace
#Emily, Library Company of Philadelphia
#Sarah, Minnesota historical society

==Points Discussed==

===Status of migration document===
We think this should be good to go. Karen and Trevor will dig it up and talk with LC folks about posting a draft version of it to The Signal.

===Future Presentations===
#Max offered to present on a project he is working on involving integrating Archivematica, archivespace dSpace. (Slated for May 26th)
#Sybil volunteered to talk about chronopolis (Slated for June 29th)
#Future interest in rescheduling a BWFLA emulation as a service presentation
#Future interest in scheduling an Academic Preservation Trust presentation

=== Wiki Cleanup ===
Leah volunteered to take a look at cleaning up the wiki.

=== New Project Idea: Digital Preservation Infrastructure Tours ===
To frame a series of presentations and interviews that would be published on The Signal we establish a set of questions for presenters/interviewies to respond to. The idea is to get people from different organizations to describe the tools and systems they are using and explain what things are working well together and where their pain points are. Trevor volunteered to sketch out the questions for these interviews/presentations which are [[NDSA:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vkFjbw3jKfqLosKwWONlILMxicjVLza5KdEEhFnhPgk/edit?usp=sharing | available here ]].

NDSA:NDSATalk-AV-March2014-FINALVersion.pdf

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:NDSATalk-AV-March2014-FINAL2.pdf

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:PBEBUCore2015.pdf

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:March 16, 2014 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 11 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

== Link to Recording ==
*https://locosi.adobeconnect.com/p46cc3uuvbr/
*passcode: ndsa

== Announcements and Project Updates ==
* Video Survey Update - blog post on challenges in managing video collection forthcoming, a “next steps” meeting is soon to occur and participation is welcome, e-mail NDSA Standards and Practices group if interested.
* Archiving Email Symposium - June 2-3, 2015 at Library of Congress. Email Kate or Erin for more info.

== Today’s discussion topic: Issues, challenges and solutions for cataloging AV collections Pt 2 ==
*Casey Davis, WGBH/American Archive project: Report of the PBCore RDF Ontology Hackathon [[NDSA:media:PBEBUCore2015.pdf | presentation ]]
**Shared during presentation: EBUCore metadata documentation: https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3293.pdf
*Lisa Snider, Canadian Museum for Human Rights: building new archive, bilingual collections, AV preservation and access with accessibility for people with disabilities [[NDSA:media: NDSATalk-AV-March2014-FINALVersion.pdf | presentation]]
*John Spencer, BMS/Chace: risk to video materials (mainly born-digital) and how they are not being handled properly

== Upcoming sessions ==
*April 20, 1-2 pm eastern
*future topics:
**Levels of Digital Preservation
**National Agenda
**Other ideas? Please contact Andrea, Kate or Erin with suggestions!

NDSA:February 23, 2014 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 5 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Notes: Joey Heinen, Harvard Library

== Administrivia (New member introductions) ==

== Announcements and Project Updates ==
* Video Survey Update - blog post on challenges in managing video collection forthcoming, a “next steps” meeting is soon to occur and participation is welcome, e-mail NDSA Standards and Practices group if interested.

== Today’s discussion topic: Issues, challenges and solutions for cataloging AV collections Pt 1 ==
Chris Lacinak AVPS: tool demo, due to time constraints could only cover AVCC and Catalyst, MediaSCORE and AMS info available upon request.

'''LINK TO DEMO RECORDING:'''
* https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/url/qlx16z8W4T6d_T-JcgI2m5Nr_H0edovmMAcqKn0HhL000000

Both AVCC and Catalyst are web-based and browser-based tools, login can occur remotely. Both live on web servers and are viewable in any browser. Multiple licenses can access the server simultaneously. The tools are both designed for item-level inventory and description with slightly different purposes but are both intended to galvanize group efforts around gaining intellectual control over A/V collections. AVCC (Audio Visual Collaborative Cataloging) is built with the idea of empowering volunteer workforce with a more generic approach towards workflow whereas Catalyst is more prescriptive, designed around a specific workflow. Catalyst also requires more initial set-up for implementation.

=== AVCC ===
Initial designs by AVPS, brought to Metro who provided additional funding for development, created proof-of-concept design, beta-testing, continued work with Library of Congress to refine applications.
User is presented with the main dashboard upon login. Some significant features:
* count by format
* create separate projects (useful for auditing and progress reporting)
* commercial vs. unique (provides a sense of object rarity)
* overview of storage capacity (linear footage, file size, a key for how these numbers are calculated)

Users can then navigate to the Records module. Some significant features:
* listing of all item-level records
* Add records
* Set media type: Audio, Film, Video
* Controlled list of formats (dependent on media type that is selected, required field)
* Review button for flagging and sorting records for administrative approval or auditing as necessary.

Additional Features/Benefits
The Project feature for organizing records based on their affiliation to a project can be good for auditing later on, ensuring controlled vocabulary, creating good feedback loops throughout the process, reviewing and solidifying workflows as issues arise, etc.

The option exists for duplicate records for collections that are of a similar format or which share other similar descriptive/technical characteristics. This can help make the cataloging process more efficient.
Bulk editing records is possible, though a common media type must be identified.
Records are stamped with a username, modified date and time for auditing purposes.
Removing unwanted fields requires a show/hide feature, cannot be deleted nor can fields be added as these are linked to fixed reporting functions.

Edit base allows for modifying of fields. Fields can also be scored (1 to 5) for prioritization in reporting.
Search/filter by title, format, etc.
Import/export features allows for csv or xlsx formats, can merge records into existing datasets or combine separate imported datasets so long as a unique identifier is shared across.
Reporting options: All records, prioritization report (based on score), manifest (box number, shipment batches, etc.), file size calculator (planning for digitization), linear feet, etc.
Nightly inventory back-up can be scheduled daily, e-mails a full export of the records which can download from the cloud.

=== Catalyst ===
This tool was developed as a solution to cataloging disparate and disorganized collections that may be geographically separate or within different depositories. The impetus for this project was through the New Jersey Network whose archival funding shifted and resulted in neglected and obscured A/V collections, needed to regain intellectual control over their holdings.

The most distinctive features is the workflow which involves photographing objects and linking them to catalog records. The images are in service of progressive “layers” of cataloging, starting with more generic ways of grouping content and then creating more granular data as is desired or deemed appropriate based on content or the associated collection. QA of cataloging is a benefit since the image serves as back-up and auditing the results of the cataloger are more immediate, rapid and iterative description (first pass helps to reveal what series exist, can go back and put more layers of description on top of collections deemed more valuable or at-risk).
Upon upload of the photo, a record is created and marked as “unassigned” which allows the user to catalog additional fields. Some data is generated automatically, mostly administrative or related to the upload. Records or groups of records can be assigned to specific catalogers based on their account in order to streamline the process.
Records can be flagged for approval such that an extra QC step can occur, records marked as “pass” or “fail” and metrics applied for the overall collection to gauge progress.

Project update (record, data-entry statuses), how many records are photographed (by date, team, format, similar auditing and feedback loops as offered in AVCC.
Fields can be added, edited, or moved.
Catalyst is not intended for collection management as it is designed for created a first order of intellectual control to large collections and inventorying, collection management will likely occur in a different system. Data can be exported along with the media (container photographs) and can be imported and merged to maintain these relationships (provided the destination system is able to contain images of the objects along with the record).

=== Questions: ===
* Andrea Goethals wondered if both AVCC and Catalyst could be used in conjunction.
Chris Licinak: data could be mapped to the spreadsheet format for AVCC and imported (though no support for images exists in AVCC)
* Carl Fleischhauer wanted to know more about the cloud service and support fees
Chris Lacinak: Both tools are open-source, AVCC can be downloaded off of github. Both tools need to be hosted on a server, can be added as a service through the tools. Catalyst and AVCC operate within a similar technology stack. AVCC could be run on an institution’s own server if preferred.
* John Spencer asked is it possible to store the catalog back-ups and exports within the cloud and the extent to which this data is easily decoupled from the internal structure of the tools.
Chris Lacinak: Full data set decoupling is a major part of the design

== Upcoming sessions ==
March 16, convo pt. 2
Follow up e-mails regarding the tools can be sent directly Chris Lacinak.

NDSA:February 23 2014 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Notes: Joey Heinen, Harvard Library

Administrivia (New member introductions)***

Announcements and Project Updates
-Archiving Email Symposium - June 2 and 3
-Video Survey Update - blog post on challenges in managing video collection forthcoming, a “next steps” meeting is soon to occur and participation is welcome, e-mail NDSA Standards and Practices group if interested.

Today’s discussion topic: Issues, challenges and solutions for cataloging AV collections Pt 1:
Chris Lacinak AVPS: tool demo, due to time constraints could only cover AVCC and Catalyst, MediaSCORE and AMS info available upon request.
Both AVCC and Catalyst are web-based and browser-based tools, login can occur remotely. Both live on web servers and are viewable in any browser. Multiple licenses can access the server simultaneously. The tools are both designed for item-level inventory and description with slightly different purposes but are both intended to galvanize group efforts around gaining intellectual control over A/V collections. AVCC (Audio Visual Collaborative Cataloging) is built with the idea of empowering volunteer workforce with a more generic approach towards workflow whereas Catalyst is more prescriptive, designed around a specific workflow. Catalyst also requires more initial set-up for implementation.

AVCC
Initial designs by AVPS, brought to Metro who provided additional funding for development, created proof-of-concept design, beta-testing, continued work with Library of Congress to refine applications.
User is presented with the main dashboard upon login. Some significant features:
-count by format
-create separate projects (useful for auditing and progress reporting)
-commercial vs. unique (provides a sense of object rarity)
-overview of storage capacity (linear footage, file size, a key for how these numbers are calculated)

Users can then navigate to the Records module. Some significant features:
-listing of all item-level records
-Add records
-Set media type: Audio, Film, Video
-Controlled list of formats (dependent on media type that is selected, required field)
-Review button for flagging and sorting records for administrative approval or auditing as necessary.

Additional Features/Benefits
The Project feature for organizing records based on their affiliation to a project can be good for auditing later on, ensuring controlled vocabulary, creating good feedback loops throughout the process, reviewing and solidifying workflows as issues arise, etc.
The option exists for duplicate records for collections that are of a similar format or which share other similar descriptive/technical characteristics. This can help make the cataloging process more efficient.
Bulk editing records is possible, though a common media type must be identified.
Records are stamped with a username, modified date and time for auditing purposes.
Removing unwanted fields requires a show/hide feature, cannot be deleted nor can fields be added as these are linked to fixed reporting functions.
Edit base allows for modifying of fields. Fields can also be scored (1 to 5) for prioritization in reporting.
Search/filter by title, format, etc.
Import/export features allows for csv or xlsx formats, can merge records into existing datasets or combine separate imported datasets so long as a unique identifier is shared across.
Reporting options: All records, prioritization report (based on score), manifest (box number, shipment batches, etc.), file size calculator (planning for digitization), linear feet, etc.
Nightly inventory back-up can be scheduled daily, e-mails a full export of the records which can download from the cloud.

Catalyst
This tool was developed as a solution to cataloging disparate and disorganized collections that may be geographically separate or within different depositories. The impetus for this project was through the New Jersey Network whose archival funding shifted and resulted in neglected and obscured A/V collections, needed to regain intellectual control over their holdings.
The most distinctive features is the workflow which involves photographing objects and linking them to catalog records. The images are in service of progressive “layers” of cataloging, starting with more generic ways of grouping content and then creating more granular data as is desired or deemed appropriate based on content or the associated collection. QA of cataloging is a benefit since the image serves as back-up and auditing the results of the cataloger are more immediate, rapid and iterative description (first pass helps to reveal what series exist, can go back and put more layers of description on top of collections deemed more valuable or at-risk).
Upon upload of the photo, a record is created and marked as “unassigned” which allows the user to catalog additional fields. Some data is generated automatically, mostly administrative or related to the upload. Records or groups of records can be assigned to specific catalogers based on their account in order to streamline the process.
Records can be flagged for approval such that an extra QC step can occur, records marked as “pass” or “fail” and metrics applied for the overall collection to gauge progress.
Project update (record, data-entry statuses), how many records are photographed (by date, team, format, similar auditing and feedback loops as offered in AVCC.
Fields can be added, edited, or moved.
Catalyst is not intended for collection management as it is designed for created a first order of intellectual control to large collections and inventorying, collection management will likely occur in a different system. Data can be exported along with the media (container photographs) and can be imported and merged to maintain these relationships (provided the destination system is able to contain images of the objects along with the record).
Questions:
Andrea Goethals wondered if both AVCC and Catalyst could be used in conjunction.
Chris Licinak: data could be mapped to the spreadsheet format for AVCC and imported (though no support for images exists in AVCC)
Karl ?? wanted to know more about the cloud service and support fees
Chris Lacinak: Both tools are open-source, AVCC can be downloaded off of github. Both tools need to be hosted on a server, can be added as a service through the tools. Catalyst and AVCC operate within a similar technology stack. AVCC could be run on an institution’s own server if preferred.
John Spencer asked is it possible to store the catalog back-ups and exports within the cloud and the extent to which this data is easily decoupled from the internal structure of the tools.
Chris Lacinak: Full data set decoupling is a major part of the design

Upcoming sessions
March 16, convo pt. 2
Follow up e-mails regarding the tools can be sent directly Chris Lacinak.

NDSA:Docx test file.docx

2016-02-11T19:20:52Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:December 15, 2014 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:51Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

= Minutes from December 15, 2014 Standards & Practices Working Group Call =

Compiled by Joey Heinen, Harvard Library

== Announcements and Project Updates ==

* Upcoming e-mail archiving project and tool demos: 1/7/2015 2 pm EST, 1/21/2015 2 pm EST
(Including Stanford University Library’s ePADD project, among others)

== Main Discussion – Progress Report on Stumbling Blocks Video Survey Results ==

The survey was conducted from early July to early August in 2014. The idea emerged out of the Standards Practices group discussions, noticed that many institutions voiced concerns over the challenges of preserving video content, noting that it is often the last content type to be easily ingested into most repositories. The survey aimed to get to the bottom of what the core challenges are related to video preservation (both analog and digital).

The survey was broken into 5 sections and distributed over survey monkey, the results varied in terms of responses and demographics of respondents (representatives from government, state, and special libraries and some international reach – Canada, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, etc.).

Winston Atkins discussed the analysis of institutional challenges relative to budgeting and staffing. There is still a question of metrics and how to analyze the data in terms of respondent types and their institutional context. They are currently considering models for creating institution groupings, one such model being the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (now overseen by Indiana University).

Kate Murray added that the survey did not cover formats and numbers of those formats within each institution/collection and that this may be a consideration for future surveys.

Andrea posed the question as to whether the survey respondents might be matched up against the NDSA members list to gauge the level of engagement with the Alliance and future conversations within the Standards Group.
Acquiring more user narrative might be useful for future surveys since a “Tell us About Yourself” section was optional and received limited replies.

Andrea Goethals next talked about the identified challenges which institutions were facing in their video preservation efforts and how the results were weighted. The question considered 14 challenges and asked respondents to rank those choices from 1 to 14 with 1 being the highest priority. Higher prioritities were given a weighted score so as to fully emphasize areas of greatest identified need. Any priorities for which an institution had identified as “problem solved” were given a negative value to offset this need.

The results were placed in a spreadsheet, final values with weighting were tabulated and a column was added for identifying the number of institutions that had solved each problem. “Developing Workflows” was identified as the highest priority, “Securing Storage” and “Funding resources” also high. Andrea noted that these results were interesting as they reflected practical considerations.

-For “Problems Solved,” users most identified “Management buy-in” and “knowing where to start” as solved issues, “Workflow Challenges” were not frequently solved nor was “support/technical guidance” however this final criteria was also not ranked high on the priorities. For the most part results were fairly consistent with highest-needs challenges also ranking low on the “solved” list.

-John Spencer asked whether this survey gathered “institutional” results or if each institution had only one representative/respondent. Multiple submissions were accepted within institutions and IP addresses but some “true” duplicates were removed where the same person had submitted results more than once (a couple dozen instances).

Kate Murray next discussed issues that focused on born-digital video. Interestingly enough, 73% stated analog video as a challenge whereas 42% stated born-digital as an issue and 34% other media. This was somewhat contrary to her expectations given the complexity and variety of born-digital formats in existence.

51 respondents were involved in the Born-Digital Video (BDV) survey and similar weighting was applied as that found in Andrea’s results. Results were also filtered where specific similar/differing criteria were compared against one another. “Workflow Challenges” were again consistent as identified challenges and infrequently marked as “sovled,” with “knowing where to start” again most-often identified as solved.

For institutions that solved high-priority issues:
* Workflow: Avalon, end-to-end (1 answer)
* Repository Services: Cloud-based storage
* Digital storage: cloud-based storage
* Confidence in file formats (preserves all “as is,” stay natively with DV for reformatting (BT.601), considering normalization, already using ProRes 422 files from some producers
* then compared against all respondents, main areas of difference are funding-resources (higher for born-digital) and repository services (higher for all respondents rather than born-digital)

Hannah Frost was not able to call in to the meeting so Kate spoke on her behalf.
For institutions that were NOT challenged by lack of storage and repository services, these related criteria were filtered and ranked in positions 10-14. Then a heat map was applied to the top 1-5 rankings for these groups with orange-red as higher needs and green as low needs. “Technical guidance on video formats” and” appraisal and selection” were higher priorities.
Other areas that ranked on the higher side for some respondents within this grouping were “Knowing where to start,” “funding,” “appraisal and selection,” “format guidance,” “video expertise,” and “metadata, workflows.”

Lisa Snider presented the filtered results for question 3-8 (expertise), 9 (technical/formats guidance), and 10 (metadata/standards guidance) and how these results related based on respondents with similar answers. She checked to see if there was any correlation between these answers in terms of solving the problem, looking at both raw and weighted data. “Technical guidance” was commensurate between groups (27% of the time) but “metadata” and “formats” had more limited correlation (15% of the time).

A final discussion involved how this data be made available, especially given that anonymity was promised at the outset of the survey and this would need to be maintained.

Additionally, there was a question as to how these survey results could be brought to a “milestone” point and summarized so as to get broader buy-in from deciding/funding bodies and external groups.
Andrea Goethals thought that this will need to be more fully processed and condensed as a report before considering an outreach approach for the study.

== Future topics for NSDA Standards Practice Meetings ==

* Follow-up to video, perhaps discussing best practices in workflows and formats (perhaps recruiting from some survey respondents)
* Guest presenters from NLNZ and NARA to talk about DPTR (Digital Preservation Technical Registry, a formats and software environments registry), potentially on Jan 26th
* Email archiving demos
* Feb 23rd was proposed as the February meeting but a topic is yet to be determined, input is encouraged.

NDSA:November 17, 2014 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:51Z

Dlfadm: 9 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

'''Meeting minutes - NDSA Standards and Practices, November 17, 2014
*Minutes: recording from the call
**https://locosi.adobeconnect.com/p8lupx7j3xt/
**passcode: ndsa

*Participants: Amy Kirchhoff, Andrea Goethals, Carl Fleischhauer, Carol Kussmann, Carolyn Cox, Felicity Dykas, Dina Sokolova, Karen Cariani, Lisa Snider, Lauren Sorensen, Marelle Soprano, Mary Vardigan, Meg Phillips, Michelle Paolillo, Nancy McGovern, Randy Stern, Sarah Demb, Shannon Yule Morelli, Stephen Davis, Vika Zafrin, Vitaly

== Announcements & Project Updates ==
*Stumbling Block AV Survey update - The group selected areas of interest in researching and exploring with the video survey data and will work on their areas of interest. The goal will be to report back to the group with any progress on research questions by Dec 1. The Dec call will be focused on reporting on video survey progress. If you have interest in helping with the analysis of the survey results, there is still time to jump in. Email Kate, Andrea or Erin.

*Email Interest Group – This is a group that met to talk about challenges in accessioning and preserving email. It’s membership is broader than just NDSA people. Demo sessions of email processing tools have been scheduled. The first is on November 20th, 2-3 pm Eastern of the ePADD project. Send Erin an email (eengle@loc.gov)if you want to join the Email Interest Group listserv or want to know more info about the demos.

*Optical Disc discussion - do we want to have any follow-up items from our September and October sessions? Please let Kate, Erin or Andrea know.

== Today's discussion topic: Recent Conference Recaps ==
Topics and Speakers:

*LC Storage Meeting, 9/22-9/23
**Kara Van Malssen, AVPreserve, http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/meetings/storage14.html
*Research Data Alliance -- 4th Plenary, 9/22-9/24
**Mary Vardigan, ICPSR https://rd-alliance.org/plenary-meetings/fourth-plenary/plenary4-programme.html
*iPRES, 10/6-10/10 http://ipres2014.org/ :
**Andrea Goethals, Harvard http://ipres2014.org/sites/default/files/upload/final.programme.pdf
**Nancy McGovern, MIT - mentioned to check out this resource http://www.curationexchange.org/
*AMIA Hack Day, 10/8/2014 :
**Kara Van Malssen, AVPreserve http://wiki.curatecamp.org/index.php/Association_of_Moving_Image_Archivists_%26_Digital_Library_Federation_Hack_Day_2014
*ICA, 10/11-10/15 http://www.girona.cat/web/ica2014/eng/index.php
**Nancy McGovern, MIT
*DLF Fall Forum, 10/27-10/29 http://www.diglib.org/forums/2014forum/
**Stephen Davis, Columbia - about http://www.diglib.org/forums/2014forum/program/76z/ and http://www.columbia.edu/cu/libraries/inside/units/ldpd/reports/2014/2014_DLF_APTrust_Slides/apt_dlf_2014-11-06.pdf
**Michelle Paolillo, Cornell - about the session http://bit.ly/1t8Kqga
*IASA (International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives), 10/5-10/9 http://2014.iasa-web.org/
**Kate Murray, LC (Kate didn't have time to report out but you can read her blog post on the Signal: http://blogs.loc.gov/digitalpreservation/2014/11/convergence-of-audiovisual-archivists-in-the-fairest-cape-a-report-of-the-2014-iasa-conference/)

NDSA:Innovation Meeting Minutes 11-04-14

2016-02-11T19:20:51Z

Dlfadm: 8 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA Innovation Working Group Call Tuesday, November 4, 2014, 2pm-3pm ET

= In Attendance =

* Jane Mandelbaum, LC
* Trevor Owens, LC
* Jefferson Bailey, Internet Archive
* Michelle Gallinger, Gallinger Consulting
* Emily Reynolds, IMLS
* Maureen Harlow, PBS
* Lauren Work, Virginia Commonwealth University
* Sarah Quimby, Minnesota Historical Society
* Sibyl Schaefer, Rockefeller Archives Center

= Next Working Group Meeting =

* '''Tuesday January 6, 2015 (2015, say wha!!!), 2-3pm ET'''

= TL;DR & Action Items =

* Folks will email some listservs for Q&A site outreach
* Folks have some interview ideas & plans
* Jefferson to write up short paper ideas for feedback/distro

= Recent Conferences/Events of Interest =

* 404/Linkrot symposium: http://www.law.georgetown.edu/library/404/
* DLF: (Community Google Docs): https://drive.google.com/?authuser=0#folders/0B9KcGf1gyIuvM3Y3cDJGUHNscTA
* CNI (D.C. Dec 8-9) - Will be a session on 2015 National Agenda -- additional speakers/presenters welcome!
* BRDI Big Data event - http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/brdi/PGA_152373

= Digital Preservation Q&A Site =

* Draft outreach message: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Pl66QKkZPbqlHD8a8ffZfzzUradHK0AttQjbc2xMTvI/edit
** Customize as needed
** Other blog posts to draw from: http://blogs.loc.gov/digitalpreservation/2014/07/digital-preservation-questions-meet-digital-preservation-answers/ | http://lipalliance.org/2014/09/29/questions-and-answers-for-digital-preservation/ | http://qanda.digipres.org/about
* Sign up for a listserv to email and note on doc when done: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Pl66QKkZPbqlHD8a8ffZfzzUradHK0AttQjbc2xMTvI/edit

= Insights Interviews =

* Jefferson - Ian Milligan (maybe digital history macroscope and/or Dragan/Rhizome on WA tool)
* Emily - Bethany Nowviskie
* Lauren - AP Trust / UVA
* Jane - augmented reality person
* In works - Meghan Banach Bergin, Christie Petersen, Ippolito

= Short Papers Ideas =

* Guidance on Web Archiving
** 2-3 pages max
** For a general audience, no jargon
** Summarizes current practices, current challenges, and how site owners / content creators can make sites archive friendly
** Would be something that could be handed out to site owners, legislators, and the like
** Could also be a model for basic, simple, handout-style guidance for other types of born-digital collections: born-digital personal collections, electronic records, etc
** Jefferson will write up abstract and has a couple of collaborators and will get more via ndsa-all

* Mock Digital Disaster Planning
** Maybe write up a blog post to help get feedback on framing the idea
** Pose the questions of if/why that would be useful
** Idea of coordinating with SAA's MayDay event on disaster planning (http://www2.archivists.org/initiatives/mayday-saving-our-archives) in May 2015 -- could orient delivery date around that
** Idea of working on the idea/paper/whatever at IIPC (April 2015) and at LC Storage Meeting (Fall 2015)
** Maureen will help (as possible pre-delivery) and Jane will help behind the scenes
** Jefferson will write up an abstract, but may need name not on a blog post

= Other NDSA Goings-on =

* Web Archive Report: http://blogs.loc.gov/digitalpreservation/2014/10/results-from-the-2013-ndsa-u-s-web-archiving-survey/
* Fixity Report: http://digitalpreservation.gov/ndsa/working_groups/documents/NDSA-Fixity-Guidance-Report-final100214.pdf

NDSA:2014 Jul Agenda Outreach Meeting

2016-02-11T19:20:51Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

'''NDSA Digital Stewardship Agenda Outreach Meeting Notes''' 
Monday, July 21, 2014, Library of Congress, LM 637 

'''Attendees''': Joyce Backus, NLM; Kathleen Williams, NHPRC; Amy Friedlander, NSF; Joel Wurl, NEH; Robert Horton, IMLS; Butch Lazorchak, Abigail Potter; Jane Mandelbaum 

1. Micah introduced the thinking behind NDSA releasing an annual agenda document. 
a. Audience is still funders, decision makers and other stakeholders in the digital stewardship community, broadened this year include to practitioners who have to make the case for digital preservation to funders and decision makers. 
b. Agenda is meant to reflect the shared priorities of the NDSA community, influence decision-makers, and point to ways to advance theory, practice, and collaboration around digital stewardship. 
c. Modeled after the Horizon reports that come out from EDUCAUSE every year. 

2. The 2014 Digital Stewardship Agenda has been out for almost one year. NDSA coordinating committee members and NDIIPP presented about the Agenda at several conferences and regional NDSA meetings and it was regularly referenced on the NDIIPP Signal blog. Working Groups also used the recommendations in the 2014 Agenda to shape outputs. Goals for 2015 NDSA Agenda are for it to be more specific and provide a more direct framework for NDSA work, especially the surveys that help to provide an evidence base for digital preservation. The 2015 Agenda was more broadly peer-reviewed and the initial reactions are that the 2015 is an improved version of the document and an important contribution. 

3. Reactions and Suggestions from Federal Funders 
a. From NEH: Very useful document, have seen it show up in a few grant proposals. Will consider including it in a list of recommended resources and supporting documentation when they release their next call for proposals. 
b. NEH, IMLS & NHCRP would like to schedule a briefing at their agencies to orientate their staff to the 2015 Agenda. 
c. Reach out to CENDI (fed CIOs) to make them aware of the benefits of the Agenda. 
d. From IMLS: Digital preservation is hard to fund effectively, investments beyond a project cycle are required, need a way to evaluate results. The community needs tools, technologies, standards, and practices; many need to follow, few can lead in this area. 
i.Agenda is helpful as they could use more help in matchmaking between organizations and help getting organizations ready for digital preservation programs. 
ii. Ultimate questions/metrics are: “is the content available,” “is it of interest,” “is it being used,” and “who benefits”? 
iii. NDSA is well-placed to help, it encompasses a lot of sectors.

NDSA:2014 Oct Regular Meeting

2016-02-11T19:20:51Z

Dlfadm: 5 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

October 9, 2014
== Agenda ==
#General guidance from LC management on LC participation in NDSA: Would like to discuss a plan and timeline for transitioning LC away from the NDSA Secretariat role.
#Release of 2015 National Agenda, sample press release, list of conferences (slide template), poster (talking points)
#Release of NDSA fixity document from Infrastructure and Standards & Practices WGs
#2015 Coordinating Committee elections: according to records the following peoples’ terms are up: John Spencer, Helen Tibbo, Kate Wittenberg
#LC is not to run elections, we can provide guidelines to run the elections

== Notes ==
 '''Present'''
Christie Moffett, NLM; Micah Altman, MIT; John Spencer, BMS/Chase; Jefferson Bailey, Internet Archive; Robin Ruggaber, UVA; Jonathan Crabtree, UNC-Odum; Jane Mandelbaum, Trevor Owens, Erin Engle, Butch Lazorchak, Abbey Potter, Library of Congress 
'''Not present:''' Helen Tibbo, UNC-SILS; Meg Phillips, NARA; Karen Cariani, WGBH; Andrea Goethals, Harvard; Kate Murray, Library of Congress 
 
Since the meeting is only one hour and there is a lot to cover, the CC was able to discuss just the first few agenda items. The rest will be covered over email or in the notes. 
A couple of emails were sent out just prior to the meeting. These items were quickly addressed first. 
*Christie mentioned the soon to be released '''2013 Web Archiving in the United States''' Survey report. There have been no comments from the CC on the contents of the report thus far; comments will be accepted through the 17th, after which the report will be released. It was decided that the underlying data should be make publicly available, not just on the NDSA CWG wiki. Micah volunteered to create a home for NDSA survey data at Dataverse. He responded via email following the meeting with the following citation and link to the web archiving survey data and the NDSA Dataverse. 
**Content Working Group, 2014, "NDSA Web Archiving Surveys", http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/27593 National Digiital Stewardship Alliance [Distributor] 
**The NDSA dataverse, to catalog data from past/current NDSA data collections: http://thedata.harvard.edu/dvn/dv/ndsa 
 
*Butch forwarded a message about the '''Request for Input from The Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NIRD) Program on the National Big Data Research and Development Initiative'''. https://www.nitrd.gov/bigdata/rfi/02102014.aspx. Butch suggested the NDSA could repurpose sections of the 2015 National Agenda and respond. Micah agreed it could be useful and volunteered to work on it. Written comments are due by November 14, 2014. 
 
*'''General guidance from LC management on LC participation in NDSA.''' 
**The NDIIPP staff has received direction from management that the Library of Congress will be stepping away from the NDSA Secretariat role. NDIIPP staff is to begin conversations with the NDSA Leadership Group on a timeline for how the role will be officially transitioned. NDIIPP staff will provide information about the Secretariat duties currently performed. Certain secretariat support, such as running the elections and processing MOUs, have ceased. Secretariat support such as providing website, listserv, and conference calling support, will need to be transitioned over time to NDSA members. 
**The Library of Congress supports the participation of NDIIPP staff in NDSA working groups and products that align with the defined work priorities of NDIIPP. The Library will likely become a member of NDSA and participate as any member would. The Library of Congress’ administrative contributions are decreasing; however, participation is expected to be maintained in working groups as appropriate. The requirement that a Library of Congress staff member be a co-chair for every working group will be withdrawn. 
**The discussion reflected disappointment at this decision and some confusion as to why some duties are to immediately stop being supported. While the CC expressed frustration it is generally agreed that it is good to have clarity on the contributions from the Library of Congress so the NDSA can move forward to the next phase. 
**The opportunities for supporting the Secretariat role going forward could include merging the NDSA with another existing collaborative project, seeking grant funding to support the secretariat and other roles, or designing a more lightweight administrative mechanism that could be absorbed by a current member. A neutral convener is an advantage for the Secretariat role and this should be kept in mind when looking for a new Secretariat. However, much has changed since the NDSA was originally set up and the activities the Secretariat currently supports may not be what is required going forward. The Leadership Group should think creatively as to what the NDSA needs for sustainable support. 
**Several issues came up that will need to be discussed: how an annual meeting will be supported, the transfer of logo trademarks and website domains, MOU signature process, and the revision of the NDSA Principles of collaboration (the NDSA founding document): [http://digitalpreservation.gov/ndsa/documents/MembershipPacket201311.pdf] 
**It was decided that a group should get together on a regular basis (maybe weekly) to discuss plans for the transition. It was also decided that an in-person meeting should be scheduled around CNI in Washington, DC to discuss the issues. This group could include former CC members or other founding members. Micah volunteered to send a doodle poll for scheduling each of these sets of meetings. 
The following items were not discussed but will be covered in the notes and followed up through email. 
*'''Release of 2015 National Agenda.''' The Agenda was released to the public on October 1, 2014. NDIIPP staff will not be able to support the same kind of outreach about the Agenda as they did last year but they will assist in repurposing the outreach materials from last year. Depending on interest the following materials and briefings could be prepared and scheduled: 
**sample press release 
**list of conferences (slide template) 
**poster (talking points) 
**Schedule briefings with NEH, NSF, IMLS, NHPRC, NIH on the 2015 Agenda. 
 
*'''2015 Coordinating Committee elections.''' According to our records the following CC members’ terms are up: John Spencer, Helen Tibbo, Kate Wittenberg 
**NDIIPP staff is not to run elections; they can provide guidelines to run the elections. In this time of transition, is it necessary to have an election? In looking at restructuring parts of the NDSA should the CC/Leadership Group also be evaluated? 
 
**'''Release of NDSA fixity document.''' On October 6th a fixity guidelines document was released from the Infrastructure and Standards & Practices WGs.

NDSA:2014 Sep Regular Meeting

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

September 11, 2014 

== Agenda ==
#NDSA Agenda language and release (Micah/Abbey)
#PR outreach and conference dissemination follow-up
#Outreach WG proposal (Butch)
#DP pioneer proposal (Butch)
#ICONC report release and responses (Michelle)
#Review of NDSA activates with a focus on “content” and/or “national repository” and enabling legislation priorities.
#Also attached are draft notes from the last two NDSA leadership calls and the NDSA Agenda Outreach meeting with funders. They are all brief (1pg), please review and let me know if you have any questions or edits. I will post them on the wiki on Monday, September 15 if there are no objections.

== Notes ==
'''Attendees''' 
Micah Altman, MIT; Jonathan Crabtree, Odum, UNC;
Christi Moffett, NLM;
Karen Cariani, WGBH;
Jim Corridan, State of Indiana;
Carol Minton-Morris, DuraSpace;
Helen Tibbo, SILS, UNC;
John Spencer, BMS Chase;
Meg Phillips, NARA;
Jane Mandelbaum, Abbie Grotke, Abbey Potter, Kate Murray, Michelle Gallinger, Trevor Owens, Erin Engle, Library of Congress

'''Decisions & Actions''' 

*With many items on the agenda, the order in which they were addressed was altered.
*Butch had circulated a proposal to have the NDSA leadership group take over the nomination and vetting process for the Digital Preservation Pioneer series that had been run on the digitalpreservation.gov website and now on The Signal blog. The proposal was discussed and approved by the leadership group. Helen Tibbo volunteered to be the point person for helping NDIIPP staff coordinate the first iteration of nominations and the process of selection. It was decided to select DP Pioneers 2-4 times a year. Helen and a group of NDIIPP staff will set up an initial meeting to outline a process and timeline for the first nomination.
*The only other agenda item we were able to address was the 2015 NDSA Agenda. After a lengthy discussion the decision was to respect the wishes of Library of Congress senior management and remove any mention of the Library of Congress from the NDSA boilerplate. This change is not being made on the NDSA web site or past NDSA publications but future NDSA publications that include any mention of the Library of Congress are requested to be reviewed by Library senior management.
*Micah will release the draft agenda to the NDSA membership and the final 2015 NDSA Agenda will be released approximately 2 weeks later.
*Erin will draft an outreach plan for the release and work with Micah and Abbey to finalize an outreach plan that will be shared with the leadership group and NDSA members. 
 

== Digital Preservation Pioneers: A Proposal for NDSA Coordinating Committee Stewardship ==
'''Introduction'''

The Digital Preservation Pioneer recognition program (http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/series/pioneers/) has been maintained by the Library of Congress National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program for almost ten years. The program was started to recognize the contributions of NDIIPP grant partners to the advancement of digital preservation practice. NDIIPP continues to find value in the program as it offers recognition to valuable contributors to digital stewardship practice from across the spectrum of participants, recognizing and encouraging work that supports the entire digital stewardship community. 

This document is a proposal on how the DP recognition can come under the umbrella of the NDSA and become an NDSA-supported initiative. The program has been overseen by the NDIIPP Communications team, but moving forward it is clear that the program will be healthier with greater transparency, community input and defensible criteria for recognition. 

'''Draft Criteria for Recognition'''

The Digital Preservation Pioneer awards recognize individuals working across the breadth of organizations participating in the National Digital Stewardship Alliance, including, but not limited to, universities, consortia, professional societies, commercial businesses, professional associations and government agencies at all levels. Nominees will be considered across the following criteria: 

*Significance: Contributed to projects or initiatives with impact across the digital stewardship community. "Significance" here means items worthy of attention, importance and consequence at a national or international level. Significance includes:
**Vision: Do something that wasn't done before he or she started doing it, something more than just doing his or her job well, something that took vision, independent initiative and drive. Introduced digital stewardship concepts into areas where it was not an earlier recognized.
**Leadership: Did something that either laid the groundwork or cut a path for others to follow and improve upon. Includes persons with a track record of organizational leadership, including leadership of professional associations such as the Society of American Archivists, the American Library Association, etc.
**Collaboration: Worked to develop collaborative organizations and initiatives that helped develop digital stewardship capacity independent of organizational boundaries.
*Technical Contributions: Contributed to digital stewardship initiatives either directly, or indirectly, through the application of superior technical expertise. Includes computer coding, information architecture, digital library development, database development, contributions to open source technologies that impact digital stewardship, etc.
*Education: Success and high honor through digital stewardship education initiatives, whether as an LIS educator responsible for the education and training of future professionals, or through education initiatives taking place outside the academy.
*Communication: A track record of significant communication and outreach efforts that advances digital stewardship activity.
**Longevity: Active and engaged commitment over time.

'''Proposed Nomination and Recognition Workflow'''

Nominations can be collected on an ongoing basis from NDSA members and the general public. The NDSA Secretariat will provide a web space and email address to collect nominations. Twice a year (January and July) the NDSA Secretariat will compile and provide a short list of 10 candidates to the NDSA Coordinating Committee. The NDSA CC will review the list of candidates, suggest possible inclusions, and then choose 2 or more new Pioneers at each meeting. Voting will be done by members of the Coordinating Committee. The goal will be to identify at least 4 new Pioneers a year. 

Subject to approval from the NDSA Coordinating Committee, this workflow can be implemented starting in August/September 2014.

NDSA:20140611 Meeting.docx

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:2014 Jul Regular Meeting

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Library of Congress, LM-637
July 24, 2014, 9:00 a.m. -12:00 p.m.

== Agenda ==

As the NDSA turns three and NDIIPP turns 15 we would like to revisit and discuss the vision, goals, objectives and strategy for NDSA for the next phase. 

For reference our current Principles of Collaboration and Memorandum of Understanding can be found here: [http://digitalpreservation.gov/ndsa/documents/MembershipPacket201311.pdf] 

== Notes ==

Attendees: Jim Corridan (on phone), Micah Altman, Jane Mandelbaum, Abbey Potter, Christie Moffatt, Abbie Grotke, Jonathan Crabtree, Kate Murray, Robin Ruggaber, Helen Tibbo, Meg Phillips, Michelle Gallinger, John Spencer

Digital Preservation 2014 meeting was a success, attracting more attendees than ever before. 

Federal funders meeting on Monday July 21 surfaced a number of positive ways that the 2015 National Agenda for Digital Stewardship can effect action in the digital stewardship community, including the possibility of letting the current agenda stand for several years. 

National Agenda for Digital Stewardship on track for release on September 15, 2014. 

Future actions include the establishment of a Professional funders action group to follow-up with them on progress and alignments; 

NDSA CC will work to help funding agencies find more qualified applicants and work to help workshop proposals. 

Fran Berman is interested in working more closely with the NDSA via the Research Data Alliance. Could help fund a position to work on the workshopping of potential future proposals based on the Agenda. 

Final version of the ICONC report will be released in mid-August, along with the underlying state government data. 

ICONC report will be released in conjunction with a comment from the NDSA, likely on the Signal blog, with the NDSA CC responding to suggestions in the report and noting the items already addressed and those to be addressed by the NDSA in the future. 

'''Potential Future Actions:'''

Review the original NDIIPP legislation and identify how current NDSA work maps to the original legislative intent, including both the network activities and the Secretariat activities. 

More clearly define NDSA secretariat duties, roles and responsibilities, including the key elements of the Secretariat currently handled by the Library and describe how they benefit the network. 

Review of the NDSA working group structures along the lines of those under which the RDA and W3C operate. 

Review NDSA MOU process and explore possibilities for streamlining. 

Explore the opportunities and challenges of a diminished LC role as the NDSA secretariat. 

Explore potential transition of NDSA to a 501(3) C.

NDSA:2014 Aug Regular Meeting

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Phone conference
August 21, 2014 10:00am

== Agenda ==

Review final draft of 2015 NDSA Digital Stewardship Agenda and discuss it’s release

==Notes ==
Attendees: Micah Altman, Carol Minton-Morris, Andrea Goethals, Jonathan Crabtree, Robin Ruggaber, Helen Tibbo, John Spencer, Jane Mandelbaum, Abbey Potter, Michelle Gallinger, Abbie Grotke, Erin Engle 

'''Key Points:''' 
Reviewed significant updates to the Agenda document, including the shortening of the Executive Summary and the addition of section 2.1 on digital content selection at scale. 

The Executive Summary will be the most read part of the document and should truly be a summary; the recommendations included in it are only the core ones. The CC reviewed and edited language in the recommendations to ensure clarity and inclusiveness.
Some sections were moved to reflect a better flow of ideas. 

Some language was altered in order to resonate with commercial and VC communities and some was altered to strengthen a statement.
Language about the Library of Congress contribution to the NDSA was discussed. Previous edits from Library management had removed all mention of the Library from the Agenda document. Library of Congress staff are still listed in the author section. 

Participants in the call decided in follow-up emails to include the following language in the “About NDSA” section of the Agenda document: ''The Library of Congress provides essential organizational support, logistical support, and substantive collaboration and expertise.'' 

All of these edits are transparent in the shared document in File> Revision History: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qGG-EW2qRpRmVwad7OECOzN4YqHKUoTWh_k8b432nyE/edit?usp=sharing] 

'''Decisions and Actions:''' 

The Agenda will be released on September 1 to NDSA members via the NDSA listserv. This release will be a pre-publication draft. The final report will be released to the public on September 15, 2014. 

Will plan an outreach campaign for the NDSA agenda with Library of Congress and CC members.

NDSA:Thursday, Oct 28, 2014

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 2 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

12 members in attendance.

==Roster==
*Trevor, Library of Congress
*Karen, WGBH
*Max, Grand Valley State
*Nicole, Library Company of Philadelphia
*Carol, University of Minnesota
*Martin, Chicago State University
*Jane, LC
*Mitch, NY Philharmonic
*Sybibl, RAC
*Gail, Truman Tech
*Sara, Minnesota Historical
*Euan, Yale

==Agenda==
#Presentation Calls
#Migration/moving data document discussion
#Update on Ongoing Projects
#Next Call: POWRR Project, Skip December Call

==Discussion==
===Potential Future Presentations===
Group briefly recapped the last presentation, in September Bob Horton from the IMLS presented and hosted a discussion about the National Leadership Grants program. The event was well attended and illustrates continued interested in these kinds of calls. Several suggestions were offered for potential future presentations. Karen, mentioned the Presto Center, Euan suggested bwfla's emulation platform, it was also suggested that it would be useful to have Jane provide an overview of the recent NDIIPP storage architecture meeting presentations. Along with this, there was interest in learning about AP Trust, from an organization working as a DPN node and about the role and function of private LOCKSS networks. The group will follow up to identify points of contact for these projects and find times on future calls to host these presentations/discussions.
===Migrations Document===
There was good discussion of tweaks and revisions to the document. The two most substantive points involve changing the language from "migration" to "moving" to further clarify that this is not about format migration. The other suggestion was to include a "Further resources" section to the document, something that could link out to the fixity document and other relevant resources and places to look for tools. Trevor volunteered to take a pass at drafting and adding that in advance of circulating the document one more time before moving it forward as a draft for public comment.
===Working Group Wiki Page edit===
Karen and Trevor will take a look at the Working Group's wiki and do some clean up and evaluation on updating. Any suggestions about how to make it more useful are welcome.

NDSA:Ndsa wa survey 2013.xls

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Web Archiving in the United States: A 2013 Survey (Data)

NDSA:October 20, 2014 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 2 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA Standards and Practices
10/20/14

*Recording from the call: https://locosi.adobeconnect.com/p3z92ibxb6z/
*Enter passcode NDSA

Participants:
Abbie Grotke
Alex Duryee
Andrea Goethals
Carol Kussman
Crystal Sanchez
Erin Engels
Felicity Dykas
Jenny Mullins
John Spencer
Kate Murray
Linda Tadic
Lisa Snider
Lynda Schmitz Fuhrig
Mariella Sproano
Matt Schultz
Meg Phillips
Melitter Buchman
Michelle Paolillo
Michelle Ucheck
Midge Coates
Morgan Oscar Morel
Rebecca Fraimow
Taylor McBride
Vika Zafrin
Winston Atkins

New to the call: Rebecca Fraimow, NDSR Boston Resident at WGBH

Project Updates: Erin Engle

Stumbling Block AV Survey update. Decided to do some more data cleanup to see what questions we want to ask and what the next steps will be. Next call will be on Friday, Nov. 7th, 2-3 ET.

Email Interest Group – This is a group that met to talk about challenges in accessioning and preserving email. It’s membership is broader than just NDSA people. They plan to have demo sessions by people who actually have email processing tools between November and January.
Send Erin an email (eengle@loc.gov) if you want to join the Email Interest Group listserv.

Presentation 1: John Spencer (see handout)

Summary: M-Disc does provide a durable access copy, but doesn’t know anyone in the digital preservation field who considers M-DISCs as a preservation target format.

Presentation 2: Lynda Schmitz Fuhrig, Preserving Content from Authored Video DVDs (see slides)

Questions and Discussion:

Question: a question for John about concerns on hardware, software, and firmware. Is there enough uptake in different communities for optical players to be supported on an ongoing basis?

John: Based on personal observation and customer requests, I think it’s obvious that there won’t be optical media drives for too much longer. The time when each carrier media is dominant is shorter and shorter. Each subsequent generation of technology is shorter. And now, all the content producers are trying to escape the physical (Netflix and Red Box, for example.)

Lynda: agrees with John. There just aren’t enough people out there who care about M-DISC.

Question: In our last call, one of the things Morgan talked about a cheap player that can help with playability. Can you talk about error correction in cheap players?

Morgan: cheap DVD players sometimes have more development effort in the software than in the hardware, which means error correction. Boom box can play back almost anything because they’re expected to be used in hostile environments. Higher quality hardware may reject a wider range of discs.

Question: Archivists have been asked about MDISCs for archival purposes for medium term. What are your opinions?

John: Just seen a handful of clients use it. Error rates are extraordinary. Many discs are no longer playable.

Morgan hasn’t seen clients using for preservation; it is ok for access copies.

Utah has been using MDISK because IT won’t support tape now.

There’s a do-it-yourself attitude in some archives that might use it for a stop gap before they can do something better. John thought this was OK as long as it was considered a stop gap measure.
Question: What is gained by preserving ISO disc images in addition to the files extracted from the disc?

Can’t create files that are an exact copy of what’s on the disc and have them playable. The AC3 files are very often transcoded from original files because they have an associated license, original files aren’t playable, but transcoded files aren’t exactly what was on the disc.

MPEG 2 file, still transcoding the audio. Can’t create it exactly as it is on the disc. Keeping the ISO image gives you more options to move forward from the original as well as the transcoded file when the time comes to migrate.

Wrap Up

Next call is November 17 from 1:00 to 2:00.

Agenda will be a report out on the highlights of the many recent conferences (AES, iPres, etc.)
In December we may focus on analyzed results of the video survey.

NDSA:Meeting minutes 10/1/14

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

CWG meeting 10/1/14

== Agenda ==

*Welcome new members
*Examples of past, present, or future work with digital content creators
*Brainstorming session/discussion: 1) What are the top challenges of working with content creators? and 2) What are the ways that the CWG can provide support for working with creators?

== Recording ==

https://locosi.adobeconnect.com/admin/meeting/sco/recordings/local/info?account-id=1271691341&filter-rows=20&filter-start=0&sco-id=1289273142&select-all=true&source=true&tab-id=1271691345

Password: ndsa

== Notes ==

There were no new members on the call.

'''Web Archiving Survey Report'''

The report was shared with the NDSA Coordinating Committee 9/25 with a request for comments or concerns by 10/3. Thanks again to CWG members who provided feedback.

'''Work with content creators'''

Two CWG members shared their experiences and insights working with the creators of born-digital content:

Nicholas Taylor, Stanford University Libraries: Nicholas shared the guidance developed at Stanford for creators to increase the archivability of their Web content. The guidance includes sections on improving accessibility of content now and for future access; creating Web sites that are more friendly to Web crawlers; ways to describe content to make it more discoverable; and a list of tools and resources to use to help improve archivability. This guidance was developed as part of an outreach effort to the Stanford web master community with a goal to make changes upstream to their Content Management System. This archivability guidance has been communicated to Web managers, IT forums, and presented at an IT unconference. Communication about this guidance is centered on going where the IT professionals are to talk to them about archivability, and to show Web managers the benefits to them for making changes (performance, usability, etc).

Edward McCain, Donald W. Reynolds Institute: Edward spoke about the planned November 10-11 meeting at the Reynolds Institute "Dodging the Memory Hole: Saving Born-digital News Content," (http://rjionline.org/events/memoryhole). The conference is being advertised via the NDSA list, other professional lists, Online News Association (ONA), investigative reporting, and Twitter ONA.

Edward reflected that there has been no coordinated effort to preserve born-digital news content so far, and hopes that getting people together for two days will allow people to work on some of the issues they are most concerned about. The agenda will be created at the meeting. Bringing a diverse group of attendees to the meeting has been a challenge: It has been easier to get people from memory institutions and not so easy to bring journalists.

Edward is looking to get a better plan for increasing the number of organizations that will commit to preservation. Perhaps by partnering news organizations with cultural heritage institutions? Better outreach to news organizations like the American Society of News Editors or the Online News Association? How can we help them preserve their content?

The discussion then led to other work with Content Creators:

Lori Donovan from the Internet Archive mentioned that Archive-It partners sometimes contact creators when they have technical problems crawling external Web sites. Increasingly Web masters are coming back asking how they can make their sites better for crawling.

Another CWG member added that the POWRR Project (Preserving Objects With Restricted Resources) at http://digitalpowrr.niu.edu/ has good takeaways for working with content creators

'''Challenges, strategies, and resources discussed in the 10/1 meeting:'''
(please do add more if any have been left off!)
*Challenges:
**Systematic issues in Content Management Systems
**Creators just want to keep moving; hard to pitch archivability
**Corporate executives are hard to get involved
*Strategies:
**Interventions with Content creators to make their content more archivable.
**Meet content creators where they are
**Show the benefits to content creator; find avenues of self-interest; for a business, this might be communicating about the value of caring for their assets. Maybe there is a possibility of monetizing back content?
**For news services that rely on archives, show that archives are a valuable resource of reusable content (Archives as primary content ready for reuse)
**Create an NDSA-wide set of guidance to use across the membership for work with creators? Perhaps put a call out to NDSA-All to gauge interest?
*Resources:
**Stanford Digital Library Blog post that introduces the guidance on Web site archivability: https://library.stanford.edu/blogs/digital-library-blog/2014/09/guidance-building-archivable-websites.
**POWRR Project (Preserving Objects With Restricted Resources) guidance at http://powrr-wiki.lib.niu.edu/index.php/One_Pagers_tailored_to_educate_different_professionals
**RJI's Journalism Digital News Archive at http://rjionline.org/jdna

NDSA:2015Agenda press release draft.doc

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:2015NationalAgendaConferenceAbstract.doc

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:Media wiki test.docx

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:2015NationalAgendaConferenceAbstract.pdf

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:2015 National Agenda for Digital Stewardship

2016-02-11T19:20:50Z

Dlfadm: 14 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Return to [[NDSA:Outreach Working Group]] Home

==Introduction==
The 2015 National Agenda for Digital Stewardship highlights emerging trends, identifies gaps in digital stewardship activity and provides funders and decision-makers with insight into the work needed to ensure that today's valuable digital content remains accessible and comprehensible in the future, supporting a thriving economy, a robust democracy and a rich cultural heritage.

The 2015 Agenda is the result of many months of individual effort and dedicated institutional support from across the NDSA community; and was improved by hundreds of review comments coming not only from NDSA members but also from many reviewers in the national and international preservation community.

Download the full report or the executive summary at http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/ndsa/nationalagenda/index.html.

==Background Information==

The National Digital Stewardship Alliance (NDSA) is in a unique position to identify and communicate the challenges, opportunities, and priorities for digital preservation activities in the United States. The 2015 National Agenda for Digital Stewardship identifies emerging trends, opportunities, and gaps in national digital stewardship activity. The agenda is intended to be of use to NDSA members and to the digital preservation community as a whole. It is an evaluation of the year’s challenges and emerging issues that would inform digital preservation work across the nation, directed at funders and executive decision makers.

The 2015 National Agenda for Digital Stewardship is authored by the NDSA joint leadership group. This group is made up of the Coordinating Committee members, the Working Group co-chairs, and the NDSA facilitator.
* Micah Altman
* Jefferson Bailey
* Karen Cariani
* Jim Corridan
* Jonathan Crabtree
* Michelle Gallinger
* Andrea Goethals
* Abbie Grotke
* Cathy Hartman
* Butch Lazorchak
* Jane Mandelbaum
* Carol Minton-Morris
* Kate Murray
* Trevor Owens
* Meg Phillips
* Abigail Potter
* Robin Ruggaber
* John Spencer
* Helen Tibbo
* Kate Wittenberg

==Promotion and Outreach Materials==

===Presentation Coordination===

*'''Public Presentations''': Schedule and coordinate "road show" presentations for 2015:

===Supporting Resources===

*Executive Summary of the 2015 National Agenda for Digital Stewardship http://go.usa.gov/v8Hd

*Full Version of the 2015 National Agenda for Digital Stewardship http://go.usa.gov/v8Ah

*[[NDSA:media:2015Agenda_press_release_draft.doc | National Agenda Press Release]]

*Presentation Slides (TBD)

*[[NDSA:media:2015NationalAgendaConferenceAbstract.doc | Generic 2015 National Agenda conference proposal abstract]]

*Poster (TBD)

*Event Calendar for 2015 National Agenda Presentations will be posted to the NDSA Calendar: http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/ndsa/calendar.html#tab2

====Sample tweets====

It's time for a National Agenda for Digital Stewardship http://go.usa.gov/v8Ah #nationalagenda @NDSA2

"Effective digital stewardship is vital to maintaining the nation’s cultural heritage..." http://go.usa.gov/v8Ah #nationalagenda @NDSA2

160 organizations band together to launch debut National Agenda for Digital Stewardship http://go.usa.gov/v8Ah #nationalagenda @NDSA2

====Quotes====

"Digital preservation is all about the digital CONTENT, preserving it so people can use it. The National Agenda helps us focus our efforts to preserve the amazingly rich digital content." - Cathy Hartman, XXXXX

"The Agenda identifies our most pressing digital preservation challenges as a nation and gives us the direction to deal with them collaboratively." -Andrea Goethals, XXXXX

(Feel free to add your own!)

===Media Mentions===

NDSA:Innovation Meeting Minutes 09-09-14

2016-02-11T19:20:49Z

Dlfadm: 2 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA Innovation Working Group Call Monday September 9, 2014, 2pm-3pm ET

= In Attendance =

* Jane Mandelbaum, LC
* Trevor Owens, LC
* Jefferson Bailey, Internet Archive
* Chelcie Rowell, Wake Forest University
* Sumitra Duncan, New York Art Resources Consortium
* Maureen Harlow, PBS
* Sheila Morrissey, Ithaka

= Next Working Group Meeting =

* '''Tuesday November 4, 2014, 2-3pm ET'''

= Action Items =

* YOU! - Comment on draft outreach message: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Pl66QKkZPbqlHD8a8ffZfzzUradHK0AttQjbc2xMTvI/edit
* YOU! - Add potential lists/blogs to contact: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Pl66QKkZPbqlHD8a8ffZfzzUradHK0AttQjbc2xMTvI/edit
* JB to write up short descriptions of 2 mini-paper ideas

= DP14 recap =

* Was a success! Innovation had Awards handouts, breakfast meet up, and Q&A session. We should aim to have a live event next year
* Open forum provided an opportunity for questions - leverage that for other events and outreach
* How can we encourage/host similar sessions at other conferences
* Call to NDSA lists for ideas for conferences to present at on this topic

= Q&A outreach =

* Ping NDSA-All for a list of lists
* Author an info email to other orgs/groups
* Get regional groups in the mix
* Get affiliated newsletters in the mix
* JB has blog post coming up for LIPA
* Maybe have a calendar of outreach activities we can share and all work on

= Insights Interviews =

* Over 50 entries in the Insights Interviews series!
* Jane has one with astronomer from DP14
* Jefferson has one on Digpres survey
* Trevor has many, including Ippolito
* A couple from previous call are still in queue

= New Ideas =

* JB has two short paper ideas:
* 2-3 page plain language doc that explain current challenges in web archiving to non-technical / general public
* Digital Disaster Planning: lots of disaster planning docs for LAMs but none digital specific; can be guidance doc or instructions for holding a mock digital disaster or some other form of. Disaster needn't be loss of data, but can be stuff going offline, etc.
* Session ideas for preservation metadata and building bridges with that community and digital preservation; better knowledge around when/how peeps using preservation metadata
* Potential ALA session (in SFO in 2015) around this idea
* Working with optical media is also an area of interest

= Other NDSA Updates =

* NDSR, Round 2 has started at LC
* Infrastructure is working on a packing list (?)
* Fixity report, with the CC and out soon
* Web Archiving survey report, with the CC and out soon
* Standards working on a paper re email

NDSA:Standards and Best Practices Working Group/Optical MeetingNotes/

2016-02-11T19:20:49Z

Dlfadm: 6 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

NDSA:Standards and Best Practices Working Group/Optical MeetingNotes/Discussion

2016-02-11T19:20:49Z

Dlfadm: 1 revision imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

Running out of time, John Spencer will present on MDisc at next month's meeting.

*Discussion
**Spencer: Plextor: only been a year that current iteration of the company has been making their own drives and have dropped support for some of their software tools.
***Observation that understand nature of companies - rebranding burners.
**Passmore: Optidrive (?), other software
**Duryee: Secondary market now for equipment - price spike in true quality plextor drives - going for a lot used before bought by another company (current iteration of brand).
**Blood: we’re always talking about a system - drive from trusted manufacturer, CD that isn’t playing, sometimes a cheap player can help resolve playability issue.
**Youket: differences in disc composition - many different dyes with different patents - that’s why focus was on developing and using error checkers.
**Blood: Interest in how to optimize burn speeds to get low error rates. Batch variation: Mitsui sold 4 times in 5 years.

NDSA:Standards and Best Practices Working Group/Optical MeetingNotes/Passmore

2016-02-11T19:20:49Z

Dlfadm: 6 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

*'''John Passmore (WNYC)''' [https://twitter.com/WNYCarchives @WNYCarchives]
**30,000 CD-DA - CD-Rs with encoded audio
**Created in early 2000s by WNYC staff
**Considered preservation masters for that era
**Group of CDs were made using same machines, same brands of discs, so in a sense a control group
**CDs function as material for the reference library for a long time - Librarians noticed that pulling CDs some were not playing, ripping properly, determined a need to get data off of the CDs ASAP, purchased equipment and made a RIP station.
**Ripped about 8k CDs, dumping wav files at digital asset management station, cataloging.
**First wanted to test some to learn about increase in errors and condition of collection.
**Plextor drives used.
**Large spectrum of discs regardless of year they were from and different levels of accessibility.
**2400 Mitsui silver CD-Rs
**20% of silver cds measuring previously detectable errors
**None passed IASA’s specs for errors - technicians instead looking for what CD is getting kicked out and why.
**Not gradual increase based on date - totally random variables
**Conclusion: CD-DAs don’t last long and are unpredictable, accelerating aging only part of issues with optical media - hardware to make data, care and handling etc.
**More open source solutions would be great to use with hardware that exists
**Contact John Passmore at WNYC: jpassmore@nypublicradio.org

NDSA:Standards and Best Practices Working Group/Optical MeetingNotes/Youket

2016-02-11T19:20:49Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

*'''Michelle Youket (LOC)'''
**Goal is to develop strategies for preservation of optical media
**Natural and accelerated aging
**1996 - pilot study - 125 random optical discs were selected from LOC collections
**Monitor effects of storage and use
**Later expanded to 1200 discs and wide range of dates of manufacture
**Follow 1SO 18921 standard
**Adhesive labeled disc after 1000 hours aging error rates higher
**Measured effects of laser engraving
**CD-R more stable than DVD - larger size of data pitch for CD, more data to be corrupted in a smaller area with DVD.
**Dye and reflective composition - significant factor in degradation - gold more stable than silver.
**Cyanine, meant as long strategy dye.
**Phthalocyanine - at times, hard to differentiate upon inspection.
**LOC created error checker software as an assessment tool.
**JVC archival disc system error checker disc drive
**Disc-to-disc migration
**Burn tests
**Report fields: media / brand / dye / jitter

NDSA:Standards and Best Practices Working Group/Optical MeetingNotes/Morel

2016-02-11T19:20:49Z

Dlfadm: 3 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

*'''Morgan Morel (George Blood Audio & Video)''' [https://twitter.com/av_morgan @av_morgan]
**500 once written DVDs - American Folklife Collection Veterans History Project.
**Staff at vendor asked to create findings report; outlining troubles and tools used.
**Formats for medium term storage white paper; ISO disc image recommended.
**ISO disc image can be mounted filesystem as if it were inserted into drive
**Extract production master files
**VideoTS folder and AudioTS folder
***[Going through folders as they appear:] VideoTS is all video content - IFO is info about playback and navigation
***VOB - audio and video data _0 menus - limit to 1GB content - need to connect to make more than one to make it playable
***All folders listed needed to be intact
**CLI: *ended up using most for project on-site at George Blood.
***hdiutil*
***dd
***ddrescue*
**GUI:
***Mediagrabber
***DVD Decrypter
***Used hdutil and ddrescure - powerful for automated systems run from server
***make workable iso images in case of damage etc
**Tools for extraction: *ended up using most for project on-site at George Blood.
***GUI: compressor, handbrake, mpegstreamclip, streamz
***CLI: FFmpeg*
**Out of 500 DVDs, 49 were problematic
**9 had physical issues - ok after polishing
**Cloning errors for rest - ddresue could still make working ISO images
**31 were DVD-ROM instead of DVD-video.
**http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/audio-visual/documents/IntrmMastVidFormatRecs_20111001.pdf

NDSA:Standards and Best Practices Working Group/Optical MeetingNotes/Duryee

2016-02-11T19:20:48Z

Dlfadm: 5 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

*'''Alex Duryee (AudioVisual Preservation Solutions)''' [https://twitter.com/archivetype @archivetype]
**Article, meant to be intro to optical disc preservation: http://www.avpreserve.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OpticalMediaPreservation.pdf
**Research being done by colleagues - studying preservation of physical media but little information exists about the process of extraction and logical structure of what is on a disc.
**What is on this disc? How to view and assess? There is no go-to process for examining.
**Precedent is law enforcement - however, few criminals use CDs and optical discs so often not supported by forensics tools.
**92% migration failure rate for data extraction.
**Researching discs as carriers of data.
**Two major types of discs - audio and data
**Audio: one of first uses of consumer optical media - designed to replace 8 track
**Instead of filesystem paradigm these discs featured a single stream of modulated data running uninterrupted throughout the disc, with byte level metadata, such as track names.
**Audio CDs more akin to tapes and vinyl because of this uninterrupted stream - only metadata differentiates “pieces” on the CD.
**The human ear is bad at detecting small errors - CD audio standard is 44.1khz - 16 bit depth.
**Even the best consumer/ professional hardware has a 98-99% accuracy in a given read - not good for preservation, as don’t know if you’re getting what you need - is it capturing important metadata?
**CD-ROM/ data CDs - ISO 9660 - Similar to audio discs except broken to sessions and tracks
**See it in a file browser and directories - convenient for archivists, what you see is what you get.
**Data cds can contain multiple filesystems - older, early mid-90s HFS file systems were common.
**Can contain all 3 filesystems and operating system used to extract data will default to one it can read. So: sometimes the OS can’t see the filesystem.
**UDF filesystem started being used, manufacturers getting together to consistently use this filesystem.
**ISO Buster - tool for this filesystem breakdown.
**Other projects
***Cabrinety Collection
***WNYC - Audio disc project

NDSA:Standards and Best Practices Working Group/Optical MeetingNotes

2016-02-11T19:20:48Z

Dlfadm: 9 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress

'''Meeting minutes - NDSA Standards and Practices, September 15, 2014
*Minutes: Lauren Sorensen, [mailto:lsor@loc.gov email me] with any changes/updates'''

----

Kate Murray: Ranking stumbling blocks for video preservation, put a call out to NDSA members, meeting on 26th of Sept. Contact Kate at kmur@loc.gov to join for meeting details

Andrea Goethals: next call S&P call will be on October 20th - continue discussion on optical media 1-2pm.

August 25th, a closed meeting happened about preserving and accessioning email records; attendees included Stanford, Harvard, NARA. Interest in opening this up to any NDSA members working with this material, aim to host listservs and list of toolsets. Coming soon: Signal blog post from Chris Prom about this meeting.

Different aspects of optical discs; still interest in our group. Welcome anyone working in this area to contribute to discussions.

----

Speakers today: '''Michelle Youket (LOC), Alex Duryee (AVPS), Morgan Morel (George Blood Audio & Video).'''

*'''Michelle Youket (LOC)'''
**Goal is to develop strategies for preservation of optical media
**Natural and accelerated aging
**1996 - pilot study - 125 random optical discs were selected from LOC collections
**Monitor effects of storage and use
**Later expanded to 1200 discs and wide range of dates of manufacture
**Follow 1SO 18921 standard
**Adhesive labeled disc after 1000 hours aging error rates higher
**Measured effects of laser engraving
**CD-R more stable than DVD - larger size of data pitch for CD, more data to be corrupted in a smaller area with DVD.
**Dye and reflective composition - significant factor in degradation - gold more stable than silver.
**Cyanine, meant as long strategy dye.
**Phthalocyanine - at times, hard to differentiate upon inspection.
**LOC created error checker software as an assessment tool.
**JVC archival disc system error checker disc drive
**Disc-to-disc migration
**Burn tests
**Report fields: media / brand / dye / jitter

*'''Alex Duryee (AudioVisual Preservation Solutions)''' [https://twitter.com/archivetype @archivetype]
**Article, meant to be intro to optical disc preservation: http://www.avpreserve.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OpticalMediaPreservation.pdf
**Research being done by colleagues - studying preservation of physical media but little information exists about the process of extraction and logical structure of what is on a disc.
**What is on this disc? How to view and assess? There is no go-to process for examining.
**Precedent is law enforcement - however, few criminals use CDs and optical discs so often not supported by forensics tools.
**92% migration failure rate for data extraction.
**Researching discs as carriers of data.
**Two major types of discs - audio and data
**Audio: one of first uses of consumer optical media - designed to replace 8 track
**Instead of filesystem paradigm these discs featured a single stream of modulated data running uninterrupted throughout the disc, with byte level metadata, such as track names.
**Audio CDs more akin to tapes and vinyl because of this uninterrupted stream - only metadata differentiates “pieces” on the CD.
**The human ear is bad at detecting small errors - CD audio standard is 44.1khz - 16 bit depth.
**Even the best consumer/ professional hardware has a 98-99% accuracy in a given read - not good for preservation, as don’t know if you’re getting what you need - is it capturing important metadata?
**CD-ROM/ data CDs - ISO 9660 - Similar to audio discs except broken to sessions and tracks
**See it in a file browser and directories - convenient for archivists, what you see is what you get.
**Data cds can contain multiple filesystems - older, early mid-90s HFS file systems were common.
**Can contain all 3 filesystems and operating system used to extract data will default to one it can read. So: sometimes the OS can’t see the filesystem.
**UDF filesystem started being used, manufacturers getting together to consistently use this filesystem.
**ISO Buster - tool for this filesystem breakdown.
**Other projects
***[http://howtheygotgame.stanford.edu Cabrinety Collection]
***WNYC - Audio disc project
*'''Morgan Morel (George Blood Audio & Video)''' [https://twitter.com/av_morgan @av_morgan]
**500 once written DVDs - American Folklife Collection Veterans History Project.
**Staff at vendor asked to create findings report; outlining troubles and tools used.
**Formats for medium term storage white paper; ISO disc image recommended.
**ISO disc image can be mounted filesystem as if it were inserted into drive
**Extract production master files
**VideoTS folder and AudioTS folder
***[Going through folders as they appear:] VideoTS is all video content - IFO is info about playback and navigation
***VOB - audio and video data _0 menus - limit to 1GB content - need to connect to make more than one to make it playable
***All folders listed needed to be intact
**CLI: *ended up using most for project on-site at George Blood.
***hdiutil*
***dd
***ddrescue*
**GUI:
***Mediagrabber
***DVD Decrypter
***Used hdutil and ddrescure - powerful for automated systems run from server
***make workable iso images in case of damage etc
**Tools for extraction: *ended up using most for project on-site at George Blood.
***GUI: compressor, handbrake, mpegstreamclip, streamz
***CLI: FFmpeg*
**Out of 500 DVDs, 49 were problematic
**9 had physical issues - ok after polishing
**Cloning errors for rest - ddresue could still make working ISO images
**31 were DVD-ROM instead of DVD-video.
**http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/audio-visual/documents/IntrmMastVidFormatRecs_20111001.pdf

*'''John Passmore (WNYC)''' [https://twitter.com/WNYCarchives @WNYCarchives]
**30,000 CD-DA - CD-Rs with encoded audio
**Created in early 2000s by WNYC staff
**Considered preservation masters for that era
**Group of CDs were made using same machines, same brands of discs, so in a sense a control group
**CDs function as material for the reference library for a long time - Librarians noticed that pulling CDs some were not playing, ripping properly, determined a need to get data off of the CDs ASAP, purchased equipment and made a RIP station.
**Ripped about 8k CDs, dumping wav files at digital asset management station, cataloging.
**First wanted to test some to learn about increase in errors and condition of collection.
**Plextor drives used.
**Large spectrum of discs regardless of year they were from and different levels of accessibility.
**2400 Mitsui silver CD-Rs
**20% of silver cds measuring previously detectable errors
**None passed IASA’s specs for errors - technicians instead looking for what CD is getting kicked out and why.
**Not gradual increase based on date - totally random variables
**Conclusion: CD-DAs don’t last long and are unpredictable, accelerating aging only part of issues with optical media - hardware to make data, care and handling etc.
**More open source solutions would be great to use with hardware that exists
**Contact John Passmore at WNYC: jpassmore@nypublicradio.org

----

Kate: Running out of time, John Spencer will present on MDisc at next month's meeting.

*'''Discussion'''
**Spencer: Plextor: only been a year that current iteration of the company has been making their own drives and have dropped support for some of their software tools.
***Observation that understand nature of companies - rebranding burners.
**Passmore: Optidrive (?), other software
**Duryee: Secondary market now for equipment - price spike in true quality plextor drives - going for a lot used before bought by another company (current iteration of brand).
**Blood: we’re always talking about a system - drive from trusted manufacturer, CD that isn’t playing, sometimes a cheap player can help resolve playability issue.
**Youket: differences in disc composition - many different dyes with different patents - that’s why focus was on developing and using error checkers.
**Blood: Interest in how to optimize burn speeds to get low error rates. Batch variation: Mitsui sold 4 times in 5 years.