Yale University Library

Digital Preservation Committee (DPC)

Meeting Notes


Date:  November 22, 2004, 10:30


Present:  Nicole Bouche, Kevin Glick, Ann Green, Audrey Novak, Bobbie Pilette

Absent:  David Gewirtz


Discussion on whether the digital preservation program needed to develop its own mission statement or whether its mission is implicit in the Library’s mission statement.  Using the Columbia University (CUL) digital preservation policy as a model and looking at other policy statements, the decision was to simply use the Yale University Library’s mission statement as the opening statement of the Digital Preservation Policy (DPP).


Discussion then followed on how to go about developing a preservation policy—where to start.  Harvard’s DRS raised a number of questions which we all felt we should look at before launching into even a draft policy. 


First we looked at whom the DPP was to serve.  The conclusion is that this policy is developed keeping in mind the Library’s collections policies and practices.  This will allow other departments across the university to coordinate and consult the policy in developing policies for their digital collections but does not mandate that they follow the DPP. 


There was a discussion about what, even within the Library’s collections, this policy will cover.  Specifically thinking about licensed digital material.  Looking at the NERL language regarding long-term access of these materials, it was felt this was addressed.  The discussion then was to work this language into the DPP.  It was pointed out that the CUL policy made mention of these materials.


The question of what within the Library’s collections could be deposited was raised as well as what kind of partnership is there between preservation and subject specialists now in making preservation decisions for paper-based collections.  Will a similar relationship be between the digital expert/digital preservation specialist and subject specialists?  A discussion ensued regarding life cycle concerns and how digital materials are chosen now and may be chosen in the future for digital preservation.


Next steps:

Everyone agreed that the CUL document was a good model.  We would all go over it and make annotations and comments using it as our starting point.  Also, in reviewing and commenting on the document keeping in mind the NPO Building Blocks for a Preservation Policy booklet  http://www.bl.uk/services/npo/npo8.pdf   Also, keep in mind the Australian digital policy, especially the Recovery section in annotating the CUL policy.


Accomplished:  decision on mission statement.


Next Meeting:  Monday, November 29 at 10:30a.m. at Grad Center café.