DOCSLIB.ORG

Encoded Archival Description Tag Library

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Encoded Archival Description Tag Library Encoded Archival Description Tag Library Version 2002 Prepared and Maintained by the Encoded Archival Description Working Group of the Society of American Archivists and the Network Development and MARC Standards Office of the Library of Congress Chicago Encoded Archival Description Tag Library, Version 2002 EAD Technical Document No. 2 This tag library represents version 2002 of the Encoded Archival Description Document Type Definition (DTD), released in August 2002. It supersedes the Version 1.0 tag library published in 1998. The SAA Encoded Archival Description Working Group is responsible for updating and editing the EAD DTD (EAD Technical Document No. 1) and tag library. The Network Development and MARC Standards Office of the Library of Congress serves as the maintenance agency for online EAD documentation, including storage and delivery of electronic files and maintenance of the EAD web site, located at http://lcweb.loc.gov/ead/. Available from: The Society of American Archivists 17 North State Street, Suite 1425 Chicago, IL 60602-3315 USA 312/606-0722 Toll Free 866/722-7858 Fax: 312/606-0728 www.archivists.org 2002, 2003 by the Society of American Archivists. All rights reserved. First edition 2002 Revised 2003 Printed in the United States of America ISBN 1-931666-00-8 ii Table of Contents Preface ........................................................................................................……….v Tag Library Conventions ..................................................................................…..1 EAD Attributes ...................................................................................................….5 Introduction .............................................................................................…7 General Attributes .................................................................................…. 10 Linking Attributes ..................................................................................…18 Tabular Display Attributes ......................................................................... 20 EAD Elements ....................................................................................................…23 Appendix A: Crosswalks ...................................................................................…261 Appendix B: Deprecated and Obsolete Elements and Attributes ......................…267 Appendix C: Encoded Examples ........................................................................…283 Appendix D: Index by Element Name ................................................................…305 iii iv Preface The Society of American Archivists Encoded Archival Description Working Group1 is pleased to bring you EAD 2002, the second full version of the encoding standard for archival finding aids. This version represents a truly international collaboration in the continued development and maintenance of EAD. In 2000 the International Council on Archives Committee on Descriptive Standards published the second edition of the General International Standard Archival Description (ISAD(G)). One of the guiding principles of EAD is to maintain compatibility with ISAD(G). Many of the suggestions submitted to the Working Group in late 2000 and early 2001 reflected changes needed to maintain that compatibility; they have been accommodated in this version through the addition of new elements and/or attributes or through clarification of existing element and attribute definitions. Experimentation with EAD internationally, particularly recent tests in France and Germany, has shown that EAD is applicable to a variety of descriptive practices but also has indicated the need for structural changes. Some of the more significant changes are as follows: There are two new elements in the Descriptive Identification of the Unit <did>: Language of the Material <langmaterial>, and Material Specific Details <materialspec>. Replacing the LANGMATERIAL attribute in <archdesc> and <c>, the <langmaterial> element makes it possible to provide intelligible information about language(s) to the end user. Information such as scale for technical drawings and maps and playing time for sound recordings can be expressed in <materialspec>, expanding EAD's applicability beyond "traditional" archival materials. Archival Description <archdesc> (and therefore all components) also has some new elements. Location of Originals <originalsloc> parallels the originals/copies aspect of Alternative Form Available <altformavail>. Physical Characteristics and Technical Requirements <phystech> accommodates the new ISAD(G) rule 3.4.4, and indicates whether there are unusual physical aspects or if special equipment is needed to access the materials. Legal Status <legalstatus>, a new subelement of <accessrestrict>, replaces the former LEGALSTATUS attribute on <archdesc>. A new subelement in the <profiledesc> header element, Descriptive Rules <descrules>, accommodates the new ISAD(G) element 3.7.2 to provide the descriptive code used to create the finding aid. 1 At the time of this revision members of the Working Group were: Randall Barry (Library of Congress Network Development and MARC Standards Office), Catherine Dhérent (Archives de France), Michael Fox (Minnesota Historical Society), Tim Hutchinson (University of Saskatchewan), Kris Kiesling (University of Texas at Austin), William Landis (University of California, Irvine), Gavan McCarthy (University of Melbourne), Daniel Pitti (University of Virginia), Merrilee Proffitt (Research Libraries Group, ex officio), Lydia Reid (National Archives and Records Administration), and Meg Sweet (Public Record Office). v Structural changes have also been implemented in EAD 2002. Administrative Information <admininfo> and Adjunct Descriptive Data <add> have been "unbundled," i.e., the elements that were formerly nested within these two elements are now available directly in <archdesc> and <c>. While they provided a useful grouping tool at the highest level of description, frequently the need to open, for example, <admininfo> to use <accessrestrict> at the component level simply created tagging overhead. It should be noted that the use of <admininfo> and <add> is being deprecated by the Working Group (see Appendix B). This means that the Working Group recommends discontinuing their use because this structure will be eliminated in a future version of EAD. To facilitate grouping of elements on an as-needed basis, another new <archdesc> element has been created, Description Group <descgrp>. <descgrp> can be used to bundle most of the structural elements (except <did> and <dsc>), enabling archivists to group them logically at a given level of description. EAD 2002 presents a host of new attributes, and most of the semi-closed lists of attribute values have been eliminated. In most cases, the semi-closed lists were very Anglo- centric and inhibited international adoption of EAD (e.g., the list of controlled vocabulary thesauri for the SOURCE attribute). It will now be the responsibility of individual repositories to use consistently the code lists and terminology recommended by national practices. Finally, archivists persuasively articulated the need for certain elements and attributes in places where they weren't available in EAD version 1.0. As a result, <title> is now available in <indexentry>, and "singlequote" and "doublequote" have been added as values for the RENDER attribute, in addition to other improvements. The Working Group gratefully acknowledges all who took the time to contribute to this version of EAD. EAD is stronger for your attention and interest! In addition, we extend our deep appreciation to the National Historical Publications and Records Commission, which has provided funding to support Working Group meetings. Like many efforts of its kind, most of the work of bringing EAD 2002 to fruition was shouldered by a small group of dedicated souls. I'd like to extend my personal thanks to Daniel Pitti at the University of Virginia for once again revising the DTD (and revising…and revising…), to Michael Fox of the Minnesota Historical Society for writing definitions of new elements and attributes and for drafting a conversion script and testing the new DTD, to Tim Hutchinson of the University of Saskatchewan for careful proofreading, and to Merrilee Proffitt of the Research Libraries Group and Bill Landis of the University of California at Irvine for gathering and parsing the examples. KRIS KIESLING Chair, EAD Working Group vi Tag Library Conventions The EAD Elements section of the tag library contains descriptions of 146 elements, which are arranged alphabetically by their tag names. The Index by Element Name (Appendix D) makes it possible to locate those elements with tag names that might be hard to find alphabetically. For example, the index entry for Conditions Governing Use points to the tag name <userestrict>. The Index by Element Name also serves as a concise, easily browsable list of all EAD elements. The EAD Elements section presents information for each element as shown in Figure 1. Some of a DTD's specialized terminology is explained on the following pages as a reminder of basic SGML/XML conventions involved in encoding documents with EAD.2 Tag name Element name Description <event> Event Description: That part of a Chronology List Item <chronitem> which describes or names something that happened. The <event> is paired with a <date> (a single date or date range) and can be grouped with other events in <eventgrp>, if multiple events need to be associated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Carolyn M. Chesarino. an Analysis of Finding Aid Structure and Authority Control for Large Architectural Collections
    Carolyn M. Chesarino. An Analysis of Finding Aid Structure and Authority Control for Large Architectural Collections. A Master’s Paper for the M.S. in L.S degree. November, 2012. 41 pages. Advisor: Stephanie W. Haas This study discusses best practices in describing architectural records in special collections repositories through encoded finding aids. It argues that metadata elements within these finding aids could serve as more effective access points if end users were more easily able to develop their own ways of highlighting relationships which exist within and across collections. Based on the information gathered from semi-structured interviews, this paper reports how other archivists developed institutional standards with which to catalog and process their architectural collections. Finally, this paper provides examples of what could be achieved in the realm of data visualization in an attempt to inspire repositories to make it easier for end users to extract the metadata that archivists and librarians spend so much time collecting. Headings: Architectural drawings Faceted classification Finding aids Libraries--Special collections AN ANALYSIS OF FINDING AID STRUCTURE AND AUTHORITY CONTROL FOR LARGE ARCHITECTURAL COLLECTIONS by Carolyn M. Chesarino A Master’s paper submitted to the faculty of the School of Information and Library Science of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Library Science. Chapel Hill, North Carolina November 2012 Approved
    [Show full text]
  • Basics of Finding Aids
    Society of Ohio Archivists / Ohio Local History Alliance fall meeting, October 5, 2018 BASICS OF FINDING AIDS Cate Putirskis Ohio State University Libraries Overview ■ What a finding aid is & is used for ■ Best practices for writing finding aids ■ Anatomy of a finding aid – Part 1: Summary – Part 2: Notes – Part 3: Collection Inventory ■ Suggestions for getting started Food and Nutrition Class, 1950s What is a finding aid? ■ Society of American Archivists’ definition: A description of records that gives the repository physical and intellectual control over the materials and that assists users to gain access to and understand the materials. ■ Physical control = materials listed have a numbering or identification system applied that allows for locating and retrieving them The Lantern, 1955 ■ Intellectual control = documents the context within which the materials were created, including identifying and maintaining relationships between materials What does a finding aid look like? When are finding aids useful? ■ When researchers want to know more about what is in a collection ■ When a repository wants to share information about their collections broadly online ■ When having a (detailed) inventory of the contents of a collection is helpful for the daily work of the repository – Inventory control or collection maintenance – Determining uniqueness or overlap of collection contents ■ May be beneficial for insurance or valuation purposes Optics Dispensary, Mendenhall Hall, 1930 Finding aid best practices ■ Describing Archives: A Content Standard
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Reappraisal and Deaccessioning
    Guidelines for Reappraisal and Deaccessioning Deaccessioning and Reappraisal Development and Review Team: Peter Blodgett, Huntington Library Jeremy Brett, University of Iowa Cathi Carmack, Tennessee State Library and Archives Anne Foster, National Parks Service Laura Uglean Jackson, University of W yoming (Chair) Chela Scott Weber, Brooklyn Historical Society Linda Whitaker, A rizona Historical Foundation, Arizona State University Marcella Wiget, Kansas State Historical Society Draft 7/12/11 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Notes on Use of the Guidelines…………………………………………………………………………………………….2 Definitions …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..5 Key Concepts………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...6 Step-by-Step Process for Reappraisal and Deaccessioning…………………………………………………….8 I. Rationale……… ………………………………………………………………………………………………8 II. Preparation…………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 III. The Reappraisal Process………………………………………………………………………………..9 IV. The Deaccessioning Process………………………………………………………………………….13 V. Evaluation……………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 Appendix A: Example Checklist and Forms……………………………………………………………………………..18 Appendix B: Donor Letter Information and Templates…………………………………………………………..23 Appendix C: Deed of Gift with Language Addressing the Possibility of Deaccession………………25 Appendix D: Reappraisal and Deaccessioning Bibliography…………………….……………………………..26 Appendix E: Sample Policies…………………………………………………………………………………………………..30 1 NOTES ON USE OF THE GUIDELINES
    [Show full text]
  • ARTICLES Revisiting the Archival Finding
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by D-Scholarship@Pitt ARTICLES Revisiting the Archival Finding Aid Richard J. Cox ABSTRACT. Archivists have been creating finding aids for generations, and in the last three decades they have done this work via a succession of standardized formats. However, like many other disciplines, they have carried out such work in violation of systems analysis. Although purporting to have the users of finding aids systems first and foremost in their mind, archivists have carried out their descriptive work apart from and with little knowledge of how researchers find and use archival sources. In this article, questions are raised about the utility of archival finding aids and how they will stand the test of time. Indeed, archivists, purportedly concerned with considering how records function and will be used over time, ought to apply the same kind of analysis and thinking to their finding aids. In this article, we explore three ways archival finding aids might be examined by outsiders, namely, those concerned with museum exhibitions, design experts, and accountability advocates. Doing this should assist archivists to reevaluate their next wave of experimentation with descriptive standards and the construction of finding aids. Archivists should expand the notion of what we are representing in archival representation. Richard J. Cox, MA, PhD, is Professor, Archival Studies, and Chair, Library and Information Science Program, University of Pittsburgh School of Information Sciences (E-mail: [email protected]). Journal of Archival Organization, Vol. 5(4), 2007 Available online at http://JAO.haworthpress.com C 2007 by The Haworth Press.
    [Show full text]
  • Division, Records of the Cultural Affairs Branch, 1946–1949 108 10.1.5.7
    RECONSTRUCTING THE RECORD OF NAZI CULTURAL PLUNDER A GUIDE TO THE DISPERSED ARCHIVES OF THE EINSATZSTAB REICHSLEITER ROSENBERG (ERR) AND THE POSTWARD RETRIEVAL OF ERR LOOT Patricia Kennedy Grimsted Revised and Updated Edition Chapter 10: United States of America (March 2015) Published on-line with generous support of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Conference), in association with the International Institute of Social History (IISH/IISG), Amsterdam, and the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust, and Genocide Studies, Amsterdam, at http://www.errproject.org © Copyright 2015, Patricia Kennedy Grimsted The original volume was initially published as: Reconstructing the Record of Nazi Cultural Plunder: A Survey of the Dispersed Archives of the Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg (ERR), IISH Research Paper 47, by the International Institute of Social History (IISH), in association with the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Amsterdam, and with generous support of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Conference), Amsterdam, March 2011 © Patricia Kennedy Grimsted The entire original volume and individual sections are available in a PDF file for free download at: http://socialhistory.org/en/publications/reconstructing-record-nazi-cultural- plunder. Also now available is the updated Introduction: “Alfred Rosenberg and the ERR: The Records of Plunder and the Fate of Its Loot” (last revsied May 2015). Other updated country chapters and a new Israeli chapter will be posted as completed at: http://www.errproject.org. The Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg (ERR), the special operational task force headed by Adolf Hitler’s leading ideologue Alfred Rosenberg, was the major NSDAP agency engaged in looting cultural valuables in Nazi-occupied countries during the Second World War.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Processing Framework
    Digital Processing Framework Development of the Digital Processing Framework began after the second annual Born Digital Archiving eXchange unconference at Stanford University in 2016. There, a group of nine archivists saw a need for standardization, best practices, or general guidelines for processing digital archival materials. Members of this group were already engaged in digital processing and had knowledge and experience with acquiring, preserving, and managing born digital content but had a lot of questions about processing this type of material and making it accessible. They sought commonalities for processing digital materials and wanted to create a framework that would be extensible, flexible, useful, descriptive rather than prescriptive, and as simple as possible. CONTRIBUTORS Archivists whose time and experience contributed to this framework are as follows: Susanne Annand Sally DeBauche Erin Faulder Martin Gengenbach Karla Irwin Julie Musson Shira Peltzman Kate Tasker Laura Uglean Jackson Dorothy Waugh PURPOSE OF THE FRAMEWORK The aim of the framework is to suggest a minimum processing standard, to promote consistent practice among digital archivists, to establish common terminologies that can be used in further development of best practices, and to enhance research access. The framework brings archival and digital preservation best practices together to clarify the relationship between these related activities and thereby help practitioners make informed decisions about their collections. “Processing,” for the purpose of this framework, concerns activities that may overlap with other traditional archival functions including accessioning, preservation, and arrangement and description. Released: August 2018 1 This framework is intended to be useful and used. It should be adapted to meet the requirements of a particular organizational context.
    [Show full text]
  • A Usability Study of Online Finding Aid Navigation Rachel Walton Rollins College, [email protected]
    Rollins College Rollins Scholarship Online Faculty Publications Spring 2017 Looking For Answers: A Usability Study of Online Finding Aid Navigation Rachel Walton Rollins College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.rollins.edu/as_facpub Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Published In Rachel Walton (2017) Looking for Answers: A Usability Study of Online Finding Aid Navigation. The American Archivist: Spring/ Summer 2017, Vol. 80, No. 1, pp. 30-52. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Rollins Scholarship Online. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Rollins Scholarship Online. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Theodore Calvin Pease Award Looking for Answers: A Usability Study of Online Finding Aid Navigation Rachel Walton Abstract In a practical and user-centered model for online archival description, what navigational features are effective, efficient, and user-valued components for an academic archives’ online finding aid? Using Princeton University’s finding aid website as a prototype, this research study collected quantitative as well as qualitative data from 10 relatively inexperienced online finding aid users as they interacted with and reacted to the finding aid interface. Major navigational difficulties experienced by users included ambiguous and/or unintuitive labeling, unclear relationships between tabs, and insufficient visual cues for certain navigational features. In contrast, user-valued navigational aids included centralized hyperlinked content, nested and hierarchical content tabs, and a collection-level search bar. The article concludes with 10 pragmatic guidelines for archival professionals trying to solve the ongoing puzzle of online finding aid usability.
    [Show full text]
  • Colophons and Annotations: New Directions for the Finding
    T HE A MERICAN A RCHIVIST Colophons and Annotations: New Directions for the Finding Aid Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/american-archivist/article-pdf/65/2/216/2749386/aarc_65_2_l3h27j5x8716586q.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 Michelle Light and Tom Hyry Abstract The authors argue that finding aids present only singular perspectives of the collections they describe and fail to represent the impact of archivists’ work on records and subsequen- treinterpretations of collections by archivists and researchers. The authors place these criti- cisms within the burgeoning postmodern discourse in archival studies and make two con- crete suggestions for finding aids that would allow practicing archivists to acknowledge the inherent subjectivity of archival work and to incorporate multiple perspectives into the description of records. he finding aid has long held a central and often unquestioned place as an access tool for archival materials. While the development of EAD Tand other Web technologies has brought great changes to how find- ing aids are discovered, accessed, delivered, and structured, the types of infor- mation in finding aids and the underlying assumptions regarding their cre- ation have gone largely unchallenged.1 This is partially true because finding aids do an excellent job. They provide important contextual information about the collections they describe and represent the cohesive nature of records in a collection or record group.2 1 While the scope of what is meant by a “finding aid” can be construed broadly, we have limited our def- inition of the finding aid to that of archival inventories and registers, generally including the compo- nents and structures defined in standards such as EAD, RAD, or ISAD(G).
    [Show full text]
  • Harvard University Special Collections and Archives Joint Processing Guidelines
    Harvard University Special Collections and Archives Joint Processing Guidelines Background and Executive Summary The Joint Processing Guidelines Working Group (JPGWG) was charged with “developing a suite of best practices and guidelines for archival and manuscript collections that will serve as a Harvard-wide framework in which local practices can be embedded.” We first conducted a survey of current processing practices at 18 Harvard repositories. Data showed that most repositories have two or fewer staff dedicated to archival processing, and that all repositories but one have a backlog of undescribed or under-described material. The JPGWG then produced a set of principles, frameworks, practices, and toolkits (hereafter referred to collectively as Guidelines) in which to guide future archival processing across Harvard Library. With a consistent and efficient approach across repositories, we hope to address inconsistencies in data for easier future migrations, create a user-friendly environment for users across repositories, provide a foundation for collecting statistics to make future fundraising and collaborative projects easier to scope and plan, and allow Harvard Library a deeper knowledge of the breadth and depth of its special collections materials. The Guidelines also touch on the importance of all repositories recognizing the importance of responsibly identifying and managing Harvard University records, acquired both through direct transfer from University offices and mixed in with faculty papers donations.1 In addition to these Processing Guidelines, archivists should also familiarize themselves with the General Records Schedule (GRS) to fully understand the scope and user access restriction periods applied to Harvard University records where they appear in both manuscript collections and record groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Con Foster Collection Strategic Plan for NAGPRA Compliance
    Fall 08 Con Foster Collection Strategic Plan for NAGPRA Compliance July 2015 Con Foster Collection Strategic Plan for NAGPRA Compliance Prepared for the City of Traverse City By Bernstein & Associates, LLC Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Consultants 1041 Lafayette Street Denver, CO 80218 303-894-0648 www.NAGPRA.info 8/7/15 3:47 PM Page 1 of 43 Con Foster Collection Strategic Plan for NAGPRA Compliance ABBREVIATIONS 4 STRATEGIC PLAN USER’S GUIDE 5 INTRODUCTION 5 THIS DOCUMENT 5 EXCEL WORKBOOK 6 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS 8 OVERVIEW OF THE ACT 8 HUMAN REMAINS AND ASSOCIATED FUNERARY OBJECTS 9 SECTION 5 (25 U.S.C. 3003) & 43 CFR 10.9 - INVENTORIES AND NOTICES OF INVENTORY COMPLETION 9 43 CFR 10.11 - CULTURALLY UNIDENTIFIABLE HUMAN REMAINS AND ASSOCIATED FUNERARY OBJECTS 11 SACRED OBJECTS, OBJECTS OF CULTURAL PATRIMONY, AND UNASSOCIATED FUNERARY OBJECTS 12 SECTION 6 (25 U.S.C. 3004) & 43 CFR 10.8 – SUMMARIES 12 FUTURE APPLICABILITY RULE (43 CFR 10.13) 14 NEW INDIAN TRIBE 14 NEW HOLDING 14 AMENDMENT OF PREVIOUS DECISION 14 REPATRIATION/DISPOSITION (TRANSFER OF CONTROL) - NAGPRA SECTION 7 (25 U.S.C. 3005) & 43 CFR 10.10 15 REPATRIATION/DISPOSITION (TRANSFER OF CONTROL) – PROCESS 16 COMPLIANCE TIMELINE 17 SIX-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL FOR FULL NAGPRA COMPLIANCE* 17 NATIVE AMERICAN HUMAN REMAINS 17 CULTURAL ITEMS THAT MAY BE SACRED OBJECTS, OBJECTS OF CULTURAL PATRIMONY, OR UNASSOCIATED FUNERARY OBJECTS 17 FY 2016 17 FY 2017 17 FY 2018 17 FY 2019 17 FIGURE 1 - COMPLIANCE TIMELINE FOR HUMAN REMAINS 19 FIGURE 2 - COMPLIANCE TIMELINE
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Creating Finding Aids Using Archivists' Toolkit Contents
    Guidelines for Creating Finding Aids Using Archivists’ Toolkit Finding Aid content created using Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS). A PDF of the standard is here: http://files.archivists.org/pubs/DACS2E-2013.pdf. It also aligns with the guidelines set down by Northwest Digital Archives. Archivists’ Toolkit is an open-source piece of software that was created by archivists for archivists. It can be buggy sometimes, so be sure to click save regularly to ensure you don’t lose work if something goes wrong! Contents Creating an Accession Record in Archivists’ Toolkit .............................................................................................................. 2 Creating a Resource Record in Archivists’ Toolkit .................................................................................................................. 5 Entering a Collection into Archivists’ Toolkit and the Use of Child Elements ................................................................ 12 Appendix A: Describing Containers ........................................................................................................................................ 16 Appendix B: Guide to Creating Names and Subjects ........................................................................................................... 19 Appendix C: Location Codes .................................................................................................................................................... 23 Appendix D: Other Considerations ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • IWU Archives Flowchart: from Selection Through Storage
    IWU Archives Flowchart: From Selection through Storage IWU Archives Flowchart: From Selection through Storage (Glossary of terms available below) No Does this object/collection fit our collection development policy? Do not retain. Yes Long term analog No Is this a unique collection or record preservation of “enduring value” that was not Do not retain. decision point commercially mass produced? Retain in archives in same form as was donated, create accession record and note location in Finding Aid. Yes Is there a No Assess risk of retaining. compelling research Do we have a donor No If retained, take appropriate or access need for agreement form (for non- storage and description action as making it digital, if possible? institutional records*)? indicated in the following steps. Yes Create a digital copy and make accessible (near-line or online as appropriate**). Retain original in archives (this Yes is the "copy of record" aka the preservation copy), create No accession record and note digital and analog locations in No Determine appropriate preservation measures and Finding Aid. Cross reference the analog version's location Is any part of the Is the analog copy discard original only if 1) there is danger to rest of from the digital copy's access location. deteriorating or in donation digital? collection (e.g., mold, acid transfer) and 2) the A duplicate of the digital copy may be retained on a poor condition? informational value is confirmed as complete after storage device in order to protect the labor/cost Yes digitization. investment of making it. This copy does not require file The preferred action is to retain the original if fixity analysis in digital archive storage.
    [Show full text]