DPC Meeting Notes

2004 Dec 13

Prepared by A. Novak

 

TOPIC:The what section of the policy document.

 

DISCUSSION:

What material is included in YULs digital preservation program? Four general concepts that answer this question were addressed.We were in general agreement with the first two points, i.e.,

1)      Content type and provenance are not limiting factors in the preservation decision, and

2)      In all cases appropriate staff already determined that the material has enduring value and preservation is feasible.

 

Considerable discussion focused on the third point -- whether or not to include a list of content types in this section of the policy statement. Arguments for including it focused on the fact that such a list would provide reassurance (yes, my stuff will be preserved) and instruction by illustrating the diversity of content types. Those against worried that the balance between being illustrative but not exclusive will be difficult to achieve. For example, the list of content types offered for discussion, which was derived from the PREMIS Sept 2004 report), included:

But didnít include:

 

We discussed which content types to include/exclude, various ways to categorize the content types, e.g., by format, by function, but did not finalize the list. We concluded that we will include a high-level list of content types and will try to strike a balance between illustrating the diversity of material and creating an all-inclusive list.

 

The fourth topic of discussion concerned the source of the material.We agreed that these materials come from a variety of sources and include:

 

We questioned whether the second bullet covered Univ e-records or do we need an explicit statement about University electronic archives.

 

ACTION ITEMS:

Draft the what section based on this discussion (Audrey and Nicole)

Make a recommendation about the need for an explicit Univ ERA statement. (Kevin)