DOCSLIB.ORG

Preserving Our Digital Heritage: the National

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preserving Our Digital Heritage: the National Preserving Our Digital Heritage: The National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program 2010 Report A Collaborative Initiative of The Library of Congress First issued, January 2011 ii Contents I. Executive Summary ....................................................................................... 1 A. What Is at Stake ...................................................................................... 1 B. NDIIPP Legislation ................................................................................ 1 C. Key Outcomes and Findings ................................................................ 2 D. Moving Forward .................................................................................... 4 E. Securing Knowledge for the Future .................................................... 7 II. Understanding the Digital Information Needs of the Nation .............. 9 A. The Preservation Challenge for the Nation ...................................... 10 B. Congressional Charge to the Library ................................................ 13 C. National Plan for Preservation ........................................................... 15 D. Implementing the Plan ........................................................................ 16 III. Building the National Digital Preservation Network .......................... 21 A. Stewardship Network ......................................................................... 21 B. National Digital Collection ................................................................. 26 C. Technical Infrastructure ...................................................................... 29 D. Public Policy ......................................................................................... 31 IV. Securing Knowledge for the Future ........................................................ 35 A. Chartering the National Digital Stewardship Alliance .................. 35 B. Developing a Framework for a National Digital Collection ......... 36 C. Strengthening and Enabling Public-Private Partnerships ............. 37 D. Fostering a Public Policy Environment Conducive to Digital Preservation ........................................................................ 38 E. Investment Strategy for 2010 - 2020 .................................................. 42 F. Moving Forward .................................................................................. 43 Appendixes ............................................................................................................ 45 Appendix A: National Digital Strategy Advisory Board ........................ 46 Appendix B: Projects and Partners ............................................................ 47 Appendix C: NDIIPP Partner Tools and Services Inventory ................. 57 Appendix D: NDIIPP Partner Collections ................................................ 73 Appendix E: Proposals for the Creation of a Public Policy Environment Conducive to Digital Preservation ............................... 90 Appendix F: Partnership Networks—Recommendations for the Library of Congress NDIIPP ................................................................111 Appendix G: National Digital Collecting Strategy ................................ 122 Appendix H: Strategic Objectives 2000–2020 ......................................... 132 Figures 1. Traditional Preservation versus Digital Preservation ....................... 13 2. NDIIPP Planning Process ...................................................................... 15 3. Strategic Goals ........................................................................................ 17 4. Strategic Phased Initiatives ................................................................... 18 5. Digital Preservation Communities, 2004 and 2010 ......................22-23 6. Content Collected by NDIIPP Partners ............................................... 25 7. NDIIPP Content Domains..................................................................... 27 8. Technical Architecture for Digital Preservation ................................. 28 9. NDIIPP Standard-Making Activities ................................................... 30 10. National Digital Collection Framework ............................................. 37 11. A Potential NDIIPP Governance Structure ...................................... 117 iii iv I. Executive Summary A. What Is at Stake igital information technol- In 2000, grasping the serious- ogies are the foundation ness of this situation, Congress Dof our nation’s knowledge charged the Library to create capital. They are key to economic the National Digital Information prosperity and crucial for main- Infrastructure and Preservation taining the United States’ global Program (NDIIPP) to develop a competitiveness. They deepen strategy to meet the challenge of citizens’ engagement with de- digital preservation. A network mocracy and enrich their daily of institutions committed to pre- lives by enabling new forms serving the nation’s digital heri- A popular Government, of communication and creativ- tage is now poised to carry forth ity. Now, more easily than ever, this strategy. This report summa- without popular citizens can have access to the rizes the Program’s accomplish- information they need to gov- ments to date and outlines its information, or the means ern themselves and engage in next steps. of acquiring it, is but a lifelong learning. But the great promise of new information Prologue to a Farce or a technologies also brings un- B. NDIIPP Legislation precedented challenges because In 2000, Congress authorized Tragedy; or, perhaps both. digital information is inherently $100 million to be directed to the fragile. How does our nation Library of Congress for “a major Knowledge will forever ensure that the knowledge and undertaking to develop stan- wisdom endowed to us by gen- dards and a nationwide collect- govern ignorance: And a erations of Americans, continu- ing strategy to build a national ously collected and preserved repository of digital materials” people who mean to be their since the founding of the Library (P.L. 106-554). The digital era own Governors, must arm of Congress (the Library) in 1800, presents clear challenges for such will continue to grow? an undertaking: the escalating themselves with the power scale of data creation, the global- What is at stake is the loss of data ization of information exchange, which knowledge gives. representing billions of dollars of and the immaturity of standards investment in new information and best practices, among many. James Madison, 1822 technology, new scientific dis- coveries, and new information In response to this congressional upon which our economic pros- charge, the Library undertook perity and national security de- a process of consultation with a pend. Also at stake is the trans- variety of stakeholders from the mission of ideas, knowledge, public and private sectors that and the American people’s lega- resulted in a long-term plan to cy of creativity to future genera- ensure that content of value to tions. Preserving digital content the nation will be available for is as important today as preserv- present and future users. On the ing the records of the Founding basis of these consultations, in Generation was in 1800. 2003, the Library proposed and Statue of James Madison by Walter K. Hancock. 1 Photograph by Carol M. Highsmith. ExEcutivE Summary Congress approved a plan call- spectrum of high-value digital ing for a distributed, networked content, with special attention stewardship capacity to be de- to the needs of the public policy, veloped and maintained under education and research, and cul- the leadership of the Library of tural heritage communities. Saving digital records Congress. A multiphased imple- mentation of the plan has effec- is vital to continuity of tively leveraged the strengths of C. Key Outcomes and state governments existing organizations and led to Findings more communities joining this NDIIPP organized its initiatives Challenge: State government national effort for sustainable so- and investments around these legislative digital information, lutions to digital preservation. four strategic goals identified including bills, acts, mandated in the plan. The key outcomes reports and house and sen- The Program’s plan grew from and findings associated with the recognition that to create a each goal are summarized be- ate journals, are increasingly successful and sustainable digi- low. More detail and full reports at-risk due to technological tal preservation infrastructure, from each initiative are available obsolescence. NDIIPP should focus on four on the Program’s website (www. major goals: digitalpreservation.gov). Solution: The Minnesota 1. Stewardship network: 1. Stewardship Network Historical Society, in partner- Develop a growing national preservation network. Building distributed, networked ship with the nine other state 2. National digital collection: capacity for digital preserva- governments, is developing Develop a content collection tion and long-term steward- model practices for preserv- plan that will seed a national ship is a complex undertaking. ing legislative information collection and preserve im- It demands that action be taken resources. The project has portant at-risk content. before all the critical factors in- 3. Technical infrastructure: volved are fully understood. implemented a trustworthy Build a shared technical Supporting the growth of that information
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fixing Historic Preservation: a Constructive Critique of “Significance”
    Peer Reviewed Title: Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of "Significance" [Research and Debate] Journal Issue: Places, 16(1) Author: Mason, Randall Publication Date: 2004 Publication Info: Places Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/74q0j4j2 Acknowledgements: This article was originally produced in Places Journal. To subscribe, visit www.places-journal.org. For reprint information, contact [email protected]. Keywords: places, placemaking, architecture, environment, landscape, urban design, public realm, planning, design, research, debate, historic, preservation, contructive, critique, significance, Randall Mason Copyright Information: All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. Contact the author or original publisher for any necessary permissions. eScholarship is not the copyright owner for deposited works. Learn more at http://www.escholarship.org/help_copyright.html#reuse eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide. Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of “Significance” Randall Mason The idea of “significance” is exceed- Second, once judgments are made projects that tell their particular sto- ingly important to the practice of about a site, its significance is regarded ries. The broadening of preservation historic preservation. In significance, as largely fixed. Such inertia needs to from its curatorial roots has been a preservationists pack all their theory, be overcome, and
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Introduction
    This PDF is a simplified version of the original article published in Internet Archaeology. All links also go to the online version. Please cite this as: Nicholson, C., Fernandez, R. and Irwin, J. 2021 Digital Archaeological Data in the Wild West: the challenge of practising responsible digital data archiving and access in the United States, Internet Archaeology 58. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.58.22 Digital Archaeological Data in the Wild West: the challenge of practising responsible digital data archiving and access in the United States Christopher Nicholson, Rachel Fernandez and Jessica Irwin Summary Archaeology in the United States is conducted by a number of different sorts of entities under a variety of legal mandates that lack uniform standards for data archiving. The difficulty of accessing data from projects in which one was not directly involved indicates an apparent reluctance to archive raw data and supplemental information with digital repositories to be reused in the future. There is hope that additional legislation, guidelines from professional organisations, and educational efforts will change these practices. 1. Introduction Though we are well into the 21st century, responsible digital archiving of archaeological data in the United States is not common practice. Digital archiving of cultural resource management reports in State Historic Preservation Offices, where they are often available by request though perhaps at a cost, is common; however, digitally archiving the datasets and other supporting materials that went into the creation of those documents is not. Though a vocal minority advocates for responsible digital archiving practices (Kansa and Kansa 2013; 2018; Kansa et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Persistence of Open Access Electronic Journals Elizabeth A
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DigitalCommons@Florida International University Florida International University FIU Digital Commons Works of the FIU Libraries FIU Libraries 2016 The persistence of open access electronic journals Elizabeth A. Lightfoot Florida International University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/glworks Part of the Collection Development and Management Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Recommended Citation Elizabeth A. Lightfoot , (2016),"The persistence of open access electronic journals", New Library World, Vol. 117 Iss 11/12 pp. 746 - 755 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the FIU Libraries at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Works of the FIU Libraries by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Persistence of Open Access Electronic Journals Author Details: Elizabeth A. Lightfoot University Libraries; Florida International University; Miami; Florida; USA [email protected] Biographical Details: Elizabeth Lightfoot is the electronic resources librarian and serials coordinator at Florida International University. She has a background in serials acquisitions, with primary interest in the management and sustainability of serials and e-resources. Structured Abstract: Purpose – Open access (OA) electronic journals have been identified as potentially at risk of loss without more coordinated preservation efforts. The purpose of this paper is to test the current availability of OA electronic journals indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). Design/methodology/approach – Using publicly available journal metadata downloaded from DOAJ, individual journal URLs were tested for validity and accessibility using a Microsoft Excel Visual Basic for Applications macro.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Laws and Regulations Requiring Curation of Digital Archaeological Documents and Data
    Federal Laws and Regulations Requiring Curation of Digital Archaeological Documents and Data Cultural Heritage Partners, PLLC Prepared for: Arizona State University October 25th, 2012 © 2012 Arizona State University. All rights reserved. This report by Cultural Heritage Partners, PLLC describes and analyzes federal requirements for the access to and long-term preservation of digital archaeological data. We conclude that the relevant federal laws, regulations, and policies mandate that digital archaeological data generated by federal agencies must be deposited in an appropriate repository with the capability of providing appropriate long-term digital curation and accessibility to qualified users. Federal Agency Responsibilities for Preservation and Access to Archaeological Records in Digital Form Federal requirements for appropriate management of archaeological data are set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”), the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (“ARPA”), the regulations regarding curation of data promulgated pursuant to those statutes (36 C.F.R. 79), and the regulations promulgated by the National Archives and Records Administration (36 C.F.R. 1220.1-1220.20) that apply to all federal agencies. We discuss each of these authorities in turn. Statutory Authority: Maintenance of Archaeological Data Archaeological data can be generated from many sources, including investigations or studies undertaken for compliance with the NHPA, ARPA, and other environmental protection laws. The NHPA was adopted in 1966, and strongly
    [Show full text]
  • DIGITAL DOCUMENTATION for HISTORIC RESOURCES By
    DIGITAL DOCUMENTATION FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES by MELISSA EVE GOGO Under the Direction of Mark Reinberger ABSTRACT This paper briefly analyzes the current documentation standards for Federal programs and creates an argument for the use of digital technologies in historic documentation. The technologies of photogrammetry, and laser scanning are addressed as methods for three dimensional modeling and compared to the current standard. Additionally, the issues posed by archiving on digital media are presented and courses of action suggested. Finally, the feasibility of a universal file format for archival purposes is addressed, and current progression toward this goal discussed. INDEX WORDS: Historic resource documentation, Photogrammetry, Laser scanning, Digital photography, HABS documentation guidelines, Digital storage media, Universal file format DIGITAL DOCUMENTATION FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES by MELISSA EVE GOGO B.S., State University of New York at New Paltz, 2005 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ATHENS, GEORGIA 2011 © 2011 Melissa Eve Gogo All Rights Reserved DIGITAL DOCUMENTATION FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES by MELISSA EVE GOGO Major Professor: Mark Reinberger Committee: Wayde Brown Ashley Calabria Christine Perkins Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2011 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge my major professor, Mark Reinberger, for agreeing
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Preservation
    Historic Preservation Request We urge Congress to: • support FY 2021 funding of $61 million for State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) and $22 million for Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs). • provide $18 million for Save America's Treasures. • provide $28 million for competitive grants to preserve the sites and stories of the Civil Rights Movement. • support $10 million for Paul Bruhn Historic Revitalization grants for the rehabilitation of historic properties and economic development of rural communities. • continue to support the Historic Tax Credit by cosponsoring the Historic Tax Credit Growth and Opportunity Act (H.R. 2825/S. 2615). • support the legislative proposals recommended by the U.S. Semiquincentennial Commission in its report to the President on the country’s 250th commemoration. Introduction State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs) carry out the work of the federal government in the states and tribal communities: finding America’s historic places, making nominations to the National Register of Historic Places, reviewing impacts of federal projects, providing assistance to developers seeking a rehabilitation tax credit, creating alliances with local government preservation commissions and conducting preservation education and planning. This federal-state-local foundation of America’s historic preservation program was established by the National Historic Preservation Act. Established in 1998, Save America's Treasures is a public-private partnership that includes the National Park Service, the Institute of Museum and Library Services, and other federal cultural agencies. The grant program helps preserve nationally significant historic properties and collections that convey our nation's rich heritage to future generations of Americans. Since 1999, there have been almost 4,000 requests for funding totaling $1.54 billion.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resource Management U.S. National Park Service Presented To
    Cultural Resource Management U.S. National Park Service Presented to The Institute for Parks, People and Biodiversity University of California September 6, 2019 Stephanie Toothman, Ph.D. Kalaupapa National Historical Park Cultural Resource Management The National Park Service will protect, preserve, and foster appreciation of the cultural resources in its custody and demonstrate its respect for the peoples traditionally associated with Big Hole National Battlefield those resources through appropriate programs of research, planning, and stewardship. National Park Service Management Policies 2006, Cultural Resource Management, Chapter Five. Cultural Resources: Tangible and intangible aspects of cultural systems, both living and dead, that are valued by or representative of a given culture or that contain information about a culture. Effigy Mounds National Monument Independence National Historical Park Culture/Nature: Natural resources such as fish, clean water, and plant materials may be considered as cultural resources if they support a way of life. Salmon returning to the Elwha River, Olympic National Park Musselshell Meadows, Nez Perce National Historical Park NPS Cultural Resources Classifications • Archeological Resources • Cultural Landscapes • Ethnographic Resources • Historic and Prehistoric Structures • Museum Collections Fort Monroe National Monument Archeological Resources are the sites and material remains of past human life or activities which are of archeological interest such as tools, pottery, rock carvings, and human remains. Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site Jamestown, Colonial National Historical Park Biscayne National Park Petrified Forest National Park Cultural Landscapes represent the combined works of nature and man. They are geographic areas, including both cultural and natural resources associated with a historic event, activity, or person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resources Update
    Cultural Resources Update Department of Defense Cultural Resources Program Newsletter Volume 11, No 1, Spring/Summer 2015 The NHPA’s New Home in the US Code—Title 54 By Michelle Volkema with contributions from John Renaud, NPS As you’ve probably already heard, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) has a new home in the United States Code. The NHPA’s previous home was in Title 16 – Conservation, 16 U.S.C. § 470 et seq. Its new location is Title 54 – National Park Service and Related Programs, 54 U.S.C. § 300101 et seq. While the name “National Historic Preservation Act” has been removed from Title 54, the NHPA remains a valid statute of law, P.L. 89-665. As such, referring to sections of the NHPA as “Section 106” or “Section 110” is still correct, as those are sections of the statute and not the code, however their legal citations have changed. While the code revision was a surprise to many, it is actually just another step in a long effort to clean up the U.S. Code undertaken by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel (OLRC) beginning in 1974. The OLRC is an office within the US House of Representatives, and is tasked with maintaining, revising, and updating the U.S. Code. More about the OLRC here: http:// uscode.house.gov/about_office.xhtml;jsessionid=DC0095D711738160D197FBB4B0466803 Signed in 1974, Public Law 93-554 (2 U.S.C. 285b(1)) directed the OLRC to begin cleaning up the U.S. Code, including revision and reorganization. So, in December 2014, when President Obama signed P.L.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Cultural Heritage Stewardship Practices by and for the White
    conservation and mgmt of arch. sites, Vol. 11 No. 2, May, 2009, 148–60 Best Cultural Heritage Stewardship Practices by and for the White Mountain Apache Tribe John R Welch White Mountain Apache Tribe Heritage Program, Arizona, US and Simon Fraser University, Canada Mark K Altaha White Mountain Apache Tribe Historic Preservation Offi ce, Arizona, US Karl A Hoerig and Ramon Riley White Mountain Apache Tribe Heritage Program, Arizona, US As is true for most indigenous programmes concerned with cultural heritage management, the White Mountain Apache Tribe Historic Preservation Offi ce (THPO) operates at dynamic and contested intersections of expanding popu- lations and economies, shrinking budgets, diversifying international interests in heritage issues, and increasing indigenous demands for self-governance, self-reliance, self-determination, and self-representation. Faced with limited funds, large mandates, and land users having variable support for cultural heritage protection, the White Mountain Apache THPO has harnessed long- standing and emergent community heritage values as authentic foundations for ‘actionable’ rules promoting consultation, identifi cation, documentation, and protection for tangible and intangible cultural heritage. Developed on the basis of a decade of interactions with elders and other cultural experts, foresters, hydrologists, engineers, and planners, the Tribe’s Best Cultural Heritage Stewardship Practices illuminate challenges and opportunities faced by many THPOs and illustrate the crafting of appropriate institutional frameworks for community-based historic preservation initiatives. keywords White Mountain Apache Tribe, tribal historic preservation offi cers, community participation, best practice Introduction Tribal historic preservation offi cers (THPOs) were the last parties invited to join the federal historic preservation partnership envisioned ‘to give a sense of orientation to © W.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Cultural and Historical Preservation Is Important for Keeping an Archive of Artifacts Replicas That Can Be Used for Accurate Measuring (Richardson Et Al
    Introduction Digital Historical and Cultural Abstract It is now possible to digitally preserve and share artifacts and historical sites through the internet with the use The intent of this research is to test the effectiveness of different 3D model-making methods for digital of digital preservation techniques (Vincent et al 2017). Archaeologists and researchers can more easily collect, historical and cultural preservation. The case studies presented are of two historic pots, a lithic, a bitumen analyze, and disseminate information with the use of photogrammetry software and 3D scanning (Porter, sample, a shipwreck, and an historic windmill. The 3D models were created with the photogrammetry Roussel, & Soressi 2016). With the availability of this newer technology and the creation of 3D models, the Preservation software Agisoft Metashape and the 3D mapping Structure Sensor Mark II. Equipment used in this research public’s cultural heritage has become more assessable (McCarthy & Benjamin, J. 2014). The techniques included a DSLR camera, tripod, photo box, lazy Susan, a scale for the small objects, and a drone for the discussed in this research provide an opportunity to go beyond photographic recording and create virtual Natalie Heacock, Mark Schwartz, Ph. D. windmill project. Digital cultural and historical preservation is important for keeping an archive of artifacts replicas that can be used for accurate measuring (Richardson et al. 2012) and even printing for education and heritage sites, not only for the sake of analysis, education, and public availability, but in case of damage purposes (Pollalis et al. 2018). This exciting newer technology opens many doors for archaeologists and or loss to the sites in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resources Management Element
    CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ELEMENT Cultural Resources Management No city can hope to understand its present or to forecast its future if it fails to recognize its past. For by tracing the past, a city can gain a clear sense of the process by which it achieved its present form and substance; and, even more importantly, how it is likely to continue to evolve. For these reasons, efforts directed to identifying and preserving San Diego's historic and archaeological resources - with their inherent ability to evoke the past - are most advisably pursued. Cultural resources are physical features, both natural and man-made, associated with human activity. These may include such physical objects and features as archaeological sites and artifacts, buildings, groups of buildings, street furniture, signs, and planted materials; in short, almost anything that connotes man's past presence. For purposes of this element, a distinction is made between "archaeological" and "historic" sites. This distinction is based on the authoritative work of the State Archeological, Paleontological and Historical Task Force, appointed by former Governor Ronald Reagan in 1971, whose work culminated in the publication “The Status of California's Heritage: A report to the Governor and Legislature of California,” by W.R. Green, et. al., September 1, 1973. The California Task Force used the term "archeological site" to mean any mound, midden, burial ground, mine, trail, rock art, or other location containing evidence of human activities which took place before 1750 A.D. An "historic site" is any structure, place, or feature which is or may be significant in the state's past (1542 A.D.) history, architecture, or culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 18: Lead-Based Paint and Historic Preservation
    Chapter 18: Lead-Based Paint and Historic Preservation HOW TO DO IT ............................................................................................................................. 18–3 I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 18–6 II. Use of Lead-Based Paint in Historic Properties ................................................................... 18–6 III. Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties ............................................................. 18–6 IV. Property Evaluation ................................................................................................................ 18–8 A. Evaluating the Significance of a Property ....................................................................... 18–8 B. Risk Assessment/Paint Inspection ................................................................................. 18–10 V. Establishing Priorities for Intervention ................................................................................ 18–10 VI. Selecting Interim Controls or Abatement ........................................................................... 18–10 VII. Selecting Abatement Methods Other Than Paint Stabilization ........................................ 18–11 A. Paint Removal ................................................................................................................... 18–11 B. Component Removal and Replacement .......................................................................
    [Show full text]