Yale University Library
Digital Preservation Committee (DPC)
Meeting Notes prepared by Bobbie Pilette
Date: March 27, 2006, 10:30
Present: David Gewirtz, Bobbie Pilette, Gretchen Gano, Kevin Glick, Audrey Novak, Rebekah Irwin, E.C. Schroeder
An opportunity to discuss in general the results of the joint meeting held last Wednesday, March 22. The take home from the meeting was that preservation issues for digital objects has very much been left to the DPC. We also were aware that “overlap” as in overlapping concerns seemed to be a stumbling block in getting across the idea that each of the three groups had areas of “common interest”. We realized that we need make preservation the responsibility of all involved in digital projects. The idea of rolling out best practices and standards as they are developed was discussed.
A general conversation regarding the Rescue Repository (RR) ensued. Questions such as: who decides what in the RR gets preserved? How to identify what gets preserved? Who establishes that process?
David proposed creating a mock up of a collection registry and put it out and start to work with it. Audrey proposed changing the RR to allow for the building of some preservation components. This lead into a discussion of checksum. Audrey has put together a checksum document for the committee to review and comment on.
The question came up of what should we recommend to DPIP with regards to verifying contents of digital objects as them move from vendor to the transfer medium and into a repository. We can recommend the use of “message digest”. This can also be used to verify content for long term preservation. Kevin raised issues related to authenticity—In some folks mind will the presence of checksums/message digest somehow guarantee authenticity. Which in and of themselves, they do not. Therefore we need to clarify what it is we are doing and why it is necessary.
The discussion then went on to “trusted repository” and the question of authenticity. If using a trusted repository may not call for message digest beyond generating one upon receipt and one to check the deposit.
Bigger question of when and why to do checksums/message digests.
· David saying doing upon receipt may be all that’s doable because of the idea of scalability.
· Kevin saying we need to do it regularly and it is scalable.
· Audrey saying we should do it now to check to see if scalable.
· Review Audrey’s document on checksums and get comments back to her by mid April.
· Review Bobbie’s document on the digital preservation coordinator and get comments back to her by mid-April.
· David will mock up the Collection Registry
Meeting Schedule :
· April 3 – no meeting
· April 10 – no meeting
· April 17 – no committee as a whole meeting;
o Admin task force will meet at Law Dining