DOCSLIB.ORG

The Archivist's Video Codec/Container FAQ HP://Download.Das-Werksta.Com/Pb/Mthk/Info/Video/FAQ-Digital Vi

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Archivist's Video Codec/Container FAQ H�P://Download.Das-Werksta�.Com/Pb/Mthk/Info/Video/FAQ-Digital Vi The archivist's video codec/container FAQ hp://download.das-werksta.com/pb/mthk/info/video/FAQ-digital_vi... The archivist's video codec and container FAQ Back to all arcles Started: September 4th, 2013 Last update: September 23rd, 2016 Wrien by Peter B., Hermann Lewetz and Marion Jaks Disclaimer The topic of digital video formats is huge, technical and complex – and the decision of which one to choose is oen linked to given precondions differing from instuon to instuon. Choosing a container and codec for preserving video in digital form has a number of implicaons. Therefore, this choice should be made wisely. Since we have started developing methods for video digizaon in 2009, we connuously spend a lot of me evaluang and developing methods for responsibly storing our content to the best of our knowledge. We'd like to document, share and discuss our findings with others. It is backed up by arguments and technical evaluaons, comparisons and tests wherever possible. Please queson our statements! We welcome feedback, comments and discussions about this subject, because we believe in exchange of informaon and experiences, rather than blindly following someone else's suggesons. We would like to thank Ian Henderson, from the Naonal Archives U.K., who unintenonally inspired us to finally start wring this down, by e-mailing us a long list of quesons about this topic. This arcle represents our personal experience at the Austrian Mediathek. Topics: Pros and cons regarding video formats for archiving Audio/video codecs the Mediathek uses Video container the Mediathek uses? FFV1 as video codec Handling born-digital video Video file size (large files/segments) Codec error resilience JPEG2000/MXF Container: MKV/MOV/MXF Archiving DVDs Performance of image sequence as format (e.g. DPX/TIFF) 1 of 7 10/1/2018, 12:06 PM The archivist's video codec/container FAQ hp://download.das-werksta.com/pb/mthk/info/video/FAQ-digital_vi... Q: What are the pros and cons regarding these video formats for archiving? container video-codec audio-codec 1. MXF JPEG2000 PCM (uncompressed) 2. MXF Uncompressed PCM (uncompressed) 3. MOV ProRes PCM (uncompressed) 4. MKV FFV1 PCM (uncompressed) 5. AVI FFV1 PCM (uncompressed) This answer is so long, that we've put a detailed comparison of the "usual suspects" on its own page: Comparing video codecs and containers for archives Q: Which audio/video codecs does the Mediathek use? For captured material, we use FFV1 for video and uncompressed PCM for audio. Audio resoluon depends on the source material, but analogue sources are captured using 48kHz 24bit, as this is the SDI standard. "Born digital" material, coming in as a file already, is a whole different story. Please read up on born digital details, below. Q: Which container does the Mediathek use? We use AVI (Audio Video Interleaved). Almost every applicaon that has to do with video can handle AVI files. Ranging from Free Soware (Open Source) to proprietary tools, professional and consumer alike. It has a quite limited set of features, but this is also a main feature for long-term preservaon: simple = robust. Also: more features = more possible points of failure. Some archives argue the case for containers with complex features, but do not acknowledge the dangers accompanying this decision: the more features a container has, the more possible points of failure are added to your archive copy. Keeping this in mind, we made our decision for a simple container. In pracce, we've had almost no interoperability issues with using AVI across different tools from different vendors. Even across different operang system plaorms. We currently do not yet know of any other container that is so widely and stably supported. Q: Would you always recommend FFV1 for capture from analogue? Yes. To be more precise: We recommend a lossless codec for capturing from analogue. The reason why we use (and recommend) FFV1 is: The choice of lossless codecs is very small. We need 2 of 7 10/1/2018, 12:06 PM The archivist's video codec/container FAQ hp://download.das-werksta.com/pb/mthk/info/video/FAQ-digital_vi... something that works and is safe for long-term preservaon. In the last few years FFV1 has proven itself to offer that: It's currently one of the most easily accessible lossless codecs It's incredibly widespread, due to its availability in FFmpeg's libraries out of the box It's probably the fastest lossless codec that has compression comparable to JPEG2000-lossless With FFV1, we can capture directly in our archiving format. Without requiring any special hardware. Thanks to FFmpeg, we can transcode to virtually any format. We even run automated mass-transcodings, for example to our video content available online. Q: How sustainable is FFV1? It's not even standardized. It's not yet standardized. That's true. In theory, that sounds bad. In pracce it doesn't maer, because FFV1 was released as Free Soware (some call it "Open Source") from the very beginning. What does this mean? Quong Jason Garre-Glaser, the lead-developer of "x264" (the most widely used H.264 implementaon) on the queson of long-term format accessibility of FFV1: Portable C code is not going to stop working in 20, 40, or 100 years. Something encoded in a format with open source encoders and decoders will be available for as long as computers exist as long as it's packaged with source code. Nobody cares about how "estoteric" anything is: if a computer can run C code, it can decode anything. Even if Jason was wrong, there are no arficial restricons that would prevent anyone from translang C code to work in any future environment. No arficial restricions: FFV1 was developed as part of the FFmpeg project, which is Free Soware. Free Soware is defined by 4 freedoms: You may… 1. …run the program for any purpose (USE). 2. …study how the program works (STUDY). 3. …redistribute copies so you can help others (SHARE). 4. …improve the program, and release your improvements to the public (IMPROVE). For long-term preservaon, this means that we can even archive the source code of the encoding/decoding tool that was used to create all FFV1 files ever in existence. Literally. Compared to analogue video, this is the equivalent of archiving our recorder and replayer along with our content – and even more: Archiving the blueprints, schemacs and all parts required to build it from scratch. Now and under any, yet unknown technical condions in the future. Technically, this is a viable soluon against format obsolescence. Please make up your own opinion about 3 of 7 10/1/2018, 12:06 PM The archivist's video codec/container FAQ hp://download.das-werksta.com/pb/mthk/info/video/FAQ-digital_vi... this, and evaluate exisng applicaons or hardware producing standardized formats (like JPEG2000 or MXF) against these above menoned properes. For more informaon about how soware licensing affects archiving instuons, and its impact on sustainability of digital soluons and formats, there is a video of a talk about this subject, given at the EuropeanaTech conference in 2011. Q: Would you always recommend FFV1 for capture from digital video? It depends. When the original stream can be retrieved from tape and the codec fullfills our requirements for mid-term preservaon (e.g. DV), we would rather keep this codec and not transfer it into FFV1. Especially if the codec is lossy compressed. See the queson about born digital files for more details about how we handle born digital material. Q: Would you always transfer born digital files into your archive format (FFV1)? As most born digital files are lossy compressed and some of it store extra informaon in their original form (header info, addional data files or folder structure, etc), we always keep the original source files, as well using BagIt for preserving the original file/folder structure. We also checksum the original files. Unl the required storage becomes affordable, only the video files which do not fullfill the requirements for mid-term preservaon (i.e. the codec is proprietary, or owned by one vendor, etc) will be transferred to FFV1 – as a copy of the original file. So, mainly due to size consideraons (for the me being), our current approach is to have a "whitelist" system. Codecs on the whitelist will be kept in their original format and not transcoded. Currently, our whitelist contains the following video codecs: (Audio is always transcoded to uncompressed PCM) FFV1 (Full name: FFmpeg Video Codec 1) H.264 / x264 (Full name: MPEG-4 AVC (Advanced Video Coding)) XviD / DivX (Full name: MPEG-4 ASP (Advanced Simple Profile)) DV (Full name: Digital Video) MPEG-1 / MPEG-2 Classic MPEG-1 or MPEG-2 as used for VCDs or DVDs. The file is just "re-mulplexed / rewrapped" into a suitable container, without re-encoding of the video bitstream. Therefore, no quality is lost. 4 of 7 10/1/2018, 12:06 PM The archivist's video codec/container FAQ hp://download.das-werksta.com/pb/mthk/info/video/FAQ-digital_vi... This procedure of rewrapping has also proven to be good to detect container/wrapper issues as early as possible in the ingest process: For example, if rewrapping causes the audio/video to go asynchronous, it might indicate that the ming informaon in the source was not 100% clean. Every other video codec will be transcoded to FFV1, preserving as much as possible (bit-depth, pixel-format, colorspace, ...) Q: Is it possible to capture HD in FFV1? The actual version 1 of FFV1 is running fast enough to encode and decode SD material in realme.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PXC 550 Wireless Headphones
    PXC 550 Wireless headphones Instruction Manual 2 | PXC 550 Contents Contents Important safety instructions ...................................................................................2 The PXC 550 Wireless headphones ...........................................................................4 Package includes ..........................................................................................................6 Product overview .........................................................................................................7 Overview of the headphones .................................................................................... 7 Overview of LED indicators ........................................................................................ 9 Overview of buttons and switches ........................................................................10 Overview of gesture controls ..................................................................................11 Overview of CapTune ................................................................................................12 Getting started ......................................................................................................... 14 Charging basics ..........................................................................................................14 Installing CapTune .....................................................................................................16 Pairing the headphones ...........................................................................................17
    [Show full text]
  • Audio Coding for Digital Broadcasting
    Recommendation ITU-R BS.1196-7 (01/2019) Audio coding for digital broadcasting BS Series Broadcasting service (sound) ii Rec. ITU-R BS.1196-7 Foreword The role of the Radiocommunication Sector is to ensure the rational, equitable, efficient and economical use of the radio- frequency spectrum by all radiocommunication services, including satellite services, and carry out studies without limit of frequency range on the basis of which Recommendations are adopted. The regulatory and policy functions of the Radiocommunication Sector are performed by World and Regional Radiocommunication Conferences and Radiocommunication Assemblies supported by Study Groups. Policy on Intellectual Property Right (IPR) ITU-R policy on IPR is described in the Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC referenced in Resolution ITU-R 1. Forms to be used for the submission of patent statements and licensing declarations by patent holders are available from http://www.itu.int/ITU-R/go/patents/en where the Guidelines for Implementation of the Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC and the ITU-R patent information database can also be found. Series of ITU-R Recommendations (Also available online at http://www.itu.int/publ/R-REC/en) Series Title BO Satellite delivery BR Recording for production, archival and play-out; film for television BS Broadcasting service (sound) BT Broadcasting service (television) F Fixed service M Mobile, radiodetermination, amateur and related satellite services P Radiowave propagation RA Radio astronomy RS Remote sensing systems S Fixed-satellite service SA Space applications and meteorology SF Frequency sharing and coordination between fixed-satellite and fixed service systems SM Spectrum management SNG Satellite news gathering TF Time signals and frequency standards emissions V Vocabulary and related subjects Note: This ITU-R Recommendation was approved in English under the procedure detailed in Resolution ITU-R 1.
    [Show full text]
  • © 2019 Jimi Jones
    © 2019 Jimi Jones SO MANY STANDARDS, SO LITTLE TIME: A HISTORY AND ANALYSIS OF FOUR DIGITAL VIDEO STANDARDS BY JIMI JONES DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Library and Information Science in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2019 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Associate Professor Jerome McDonough, Chair Associate Professor Lori Kendall Assistant Professor Peter Darch Professor Howard Besser, New York University ABSTRACT This dissertation focuses on standards for digital video - the social aspects of their design and the sociotechnical forces that drive their development and adoption. This work is a history and analysis of how the MXF, JPEG 2000, FFV1 and Matroska standards have been adopted and/or adapted by libraries and archives of different sizes. Well-funded institutions often have the resources to develop tailor-made specifications for the digitization of their analog video objects. Digital video standards and specifications of this kind are often derived from the needs of the cinema production and television broadcast realms in the United States and may be unsuitable for smaller memory institutions that are resource-poor and/or lack staff with the knowledge to implement these technologies. This research seeks to provide insight into how moving image preservation professionals work with - and sometimes against - broadcast and film production industries in order to produce and/or implement standards governing video formats and encodings. This dissertation describes the transition of four digital video standards from niches to widespread use in libraries and archives. It also examines the effects these standards produce on cultural heritage video preservation by interviewing people who implement the standards as well as people who develop them.
    [Show full text]
  • (A/V Codecs) REDCODE RAW (.R3D) ARRIRAW
    What is a Codec? Codec is a portmanteau of either "Compressor-Decompressor" or "Coder-Decoder," which describes a device or program capable of performing transformations on a data stream or signal. Codecs encode a stream or signal for transmission, storage or encryption and decode it for viewing or editing. Codecs are often used in videoconferencing and streaming media solutions. A video codec converts analog video signals from a video camera into digital signals for transmission. It then converts the digital signals back to analog for display. An audio codec converts analog audio signals from a microphone into digital signals for transmission. It then converts the digital signals back to analog for playing. The raw encoded form of audio and video data is often called essence, to distinguish it from the metadata information that together make up the information content of the stream and any "wrapper" data that is then added to aid access to or improve the robustness of the stream. Most codecs are lossy, in order to get a reasonably small file size. There are lossless codecs as well, but for most purposes the almost imperceptible increase in quality is not worth the considerable increase in data size. The main exception is if the data will undergo more processing in the future, in which case the repeated lossy encoding would damage the eventual quality too much. Many multimedia data streams need to contain both audio and video data, and often some form of metadata that permits synchronization of the audio and video. Each of these three streams may be handled by different programs, processes, or hardware; but for the multimedia data stream to be useful in stored or transmitted form, they must be encapsulated together in a container format.
    [Show full text]
  • A Multi-Frame PCA-Based Stereo Audio Coding Method
    applied sciences Article A Multi-Frame PCA-Based Stereo Audio Coding Method Jing Wang *, Xiaohan Zhao, Xiang Xie and Jingming Kuang School of Information and Electronics, Beijing Institute of Technology, 100081 Beijing, China; [email protected] (X.Z.); [email protected] (X.X.); [email protected] (J.K.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-138-1015-0086 Received: 18 April 2018; Accepted: 9 June 2018; Published: 12 June 2018 Abstract: With the increasing demand for high quality audio, stereo audio coding has become more and more important. In this paper, a multi-frame coding method based on Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is proposed for the compression of audio signals, including both mono and stereo signals. The PCA-based method makes the input audio spectral coefficients into eigenvectors of covariance matrices and reduces coding bitrate by grouping such eigenvectors into fewer number of vectors. The multi-frame joint technique makes the PCA-based method more efficient and feasible. This paper also proposes a quantization method that utilizes Pyramid Vector Quantization (PVQ) to quantize the PCA matrices proposed in this paper with few bits. Parametric coding algorithms are also employed with PCA to ensure the high efficiency of the proposed audio codec. Subjective listening tests with Multiple Stimuli with Hidden Reference and Anchor (MUSHRA) have shown that the proposed PCA-based coding method is efficient at processing stereo audio. Keywords: stereo audio coding; Principal Component Analysis (PCA); multi-frame; Pyramid Vector Quantization (PVQ) 1. Introduction The goal of audio coding is to represent audio in digital form with as few bits as possible while maintaining the intelligibility and quality required for particular applications [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Lossless Compression of Audio Data
    CHAPTER 12 Lossless Compression of Audio Data ROBERT C. MAHER OVERVIEW Lossless data compression of digital audio signals is useful when it is necessary to minimize the storage space or transmission bandwidth of audio data while still maintaining archival quality. Available techniques for lossless audio compression, or lossless audio packing, generally employ an adaptive waveform predictor with a variable-rate entropy coding of the residual, such as Huffman or Golomb-Rice coding. The amount of data compression can vary considerably from one audio waveform to another, but ratios of less than 3 are typical. Several freeware, shareware, and proprietary commercial lossless audio packing programs are available. 12.1 INTRODUCTION The Internet is increasingly being used as a means to deliver audio content to end-users for en­ tertainment, education, and commerce. It is clearly advantageous to minimize the time required to download an audio data file and the storage capacity required to hold it. Moreover, the expec­ tations of end-users with regard to signal quality, number of audio channels, meta-data such as song lyrics, and similar additional features provide incentives to compress the audio data. 12.1.1 Background In the past decade there have been significant breakthroughs in audio data compression using lossy perceptual coding [1]. These techniques lower the bit rate required to represent the signal by establishing perceptual error criteria, meaning that a model of human hearing perception is Copyright 2003. Elsevier Science (USA). 255 AU rights reserved. 256 PART III / APPLICATIONS used to guide the elimination of excess bits that can be either reconstructed (redundancy in the signal) orignored (inaudible components in the signal).
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Opus Low Bit Rate Quality with Neural Speech Synthesis
    Improving Opus Low Bit Rate Quality with Neural Speech Synthesis Jan Skoglund1, Jean-Marc Valin2∗ 1Google, San Francisco, CA, USA 2Amazon, Palo Alto, CA, USA [email protected], [email protected] Abstract learned representation set [11]. A typical WaveNet configura- The voice mode of the Opus audio coder can compress wide- tion requires a very high algorithmic complexity, in the order band speech at bit rates ranging from 6 kb/s to 40 kb/s. How- of hundreds of GFLOPS, along with a high memory usage to ever, Opus is at its core a waveform matching coder, and as the hold the millions of model parameters. Combined with the high rate drops below 10 kb/s, quality degrades quickly. As the rate latency, in the hundreds of milliseconds, this renders WaveNet reduces even further, parametric coders tend to perform better impractical for a real-time implementation. Replacing the di- than waveform coders. In this paper we propose a backward- lated convolutional networks with recurrent networks improved compatible way of improving low bit rate Opus quality by re- memory efficiency in SampleRNN [12], which was shown to be synthesizing speech from the decoded parameters. We compare useful for speech coding in [13]. WaveRNN [14] also demon- two different neural generative models, WaveNet and LPCNet. strated possibilities for synthesizing at lower complexities com- WaveNet is a powerful, high-complexity, and high-latency ar- pared to WaveNet. Even lower complexity and real-time opera- chitecture that is not feasible for a practical system, yet pro- tion was recently reported using LPCNet [15]. vides a best known achievable quality with generative models.
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Speech Coding Milos Cernak, Senior Member, IEEE, Afsaneh Asaei, Senior Member, IEEE, Alexandre Hyafil
    1 Cognitive Speech Coding Milos Cernak, Senior Member, IEEE, Afsaneh Asaei, Senior Member, IEEE, Alexandre Hyafil Abstract—Speech coding is a field where compression ear and undergoes a highly complex transformation paradigms have not changed in the last 30 years. The before it is encoded efficiently by spikes at the auditory speech signals are most commonly encoded with com- nerve. This great efficiency in information representation pression methods that have roots in Linear Predictive has inspired speech engineers to incorporate aspects of theory dating back to the early 1940s. This paper tries to cognitive processing in when developing efficient speech bridge this influential theory with recent cognitive studies applicable in speech communication engineering. technologies. This tutorial article reviews the mechanisms of speech Speech coding is a field where research has slowed perception that lead to perceptual speech coding. Then considerably in recent years. This has occurred not it focuses on human speech communication and machine because it has achieved the ultimate in minimizing bit learning, and application of cognitive speech processing in rate for transparent speech quality, but because recent speech compression that presents a paradigm shift from improvements have been small and commercial applica- perceptual (auditory) speech processing towards cognitive tions (e.g., cell phones) have been mostly satisfactory for (auditory plus cortical) speech processing. The objective the general public, and the growth of available bandwidth of this tutorial is to provide an overview of the impact has reduced requirements to compress speech even fur- of cognitive speech processing on speech compression and discuss challenges faced in this interdisciplinary speech ther.
    [Show full text]
  • Codec Is a Portmanteau of Either
    What is a Codec? Codec is a portmanteau of either "Compressor-Decompressor" or "Coder-Decoder," which describes a device or program capable of performing transformations on a data stream or signal. Codecs encode a stream or signal for transmission, storage or encryption and decode it for viewing or editing. Codecs are often used in videoconferencing and streaming media solutions. A video codec converts analog video signals from a video camera into digital signals for transmission. It then converts the digital signals back to analog for display. An audio codec converts analog audio signals from a microphone into digital signals for transmission. It then converts the digital signals back to analog for playing. The raw encoded form of audio and video data is often called essence, to distinguish it from the metadata information that together make up the information content of the stream and any "wrapper" data that is then added to aid access to or improve the robustness of the stream. Most codecs are lossy, in order to get a reasonably small file size. There are lossless codecs as well, but for most purposes the almost imperceptible increase in quality is not worth the considerable increase in data size. The main exception is if the data will undergo more processing in the future, in which case the repeated lossy encoding would damage the eventual quality too much. Many multimedia data streams need to contain both audio and video data, and often some form of metadata that permits synchronization of the audio and video. Each of these three streams may be handled by different programs, processes, or hardware; but for the multimedia data stream to be useful in stored or transmitted form, they must be encapsulated together in a container format.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended File Formats for Long-Term Archiving and for Web Dissemination in Phaidra
    Recommended file formats for long-term archiving and for web dissemination in Phaidra Edited by Gianluca Drago May 2019 License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Premise This document is intended to provide an overview of the file formats to be used depending on two possible destinations of the digital document: long-term archiving uploading to Phaidra and subsequent web dissemination When the document uploaded to Phaidra is also the only saved file, the two destinations end up coinciding, but in general one will probably want to produce two different files, in two different formats, so as to meet the differences in requirements and use in the final destinations. In the following tables, the recommendations for long-term archiving are distinct from those for dissemination in Phaidra. There are no absolute criteria for choosing the file format. The choice is always dependent on different evaluations that the person who is carrying out the archiving will have to make on a case by case basis and will often result in a compromise between the best achievable quality and the limits imposed by the costs of production, processing and storage of files, as well as, for the preceding, by the opportunity of a conversion to a new format. 1 This choice is particularly significant from the perspective of long-term archiving, for which a quality that respects the authenticity and integrity of the original document and a format that guarantees long-term access to data are desirable. This document should be seen more as an aid to the reasoned choice of the person carrying out the archiving than as a list of guidelines to be followed to the letter.
    [Show full text]
  • FFV1 Video Codec Specification
    FFV1 Video Codec Specification by Michael Niedermayer [email protected] Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Terms and Definitions 2 2.1 Terms ................................................. 2 2.2 Definitions ............................................... 2 3 Conventions 3 3.1 Arithmetic operators ......................................... 3 3.2 Assignment operators ........................................ 3 3.3 Comparison operators ........................................ 3 3.4 Order of operation precedence .................................... 4 3.5 Range ................................................. 4 3.6 Bitstream functions .......................................... 4 4 General Description 5 4.1 Border ................................................. 5 4.2 Median predictor ........................................... 5 4.3 Context ................................................ 5 4.4 Quantization ............................................. 5 4.5 Colorspace ............................................... 6 4.5.1 JPEG2000-RCT ....................................... 6 4.6 Coding of the sample difference ................................... 6 4.6.1 Range coding mode ..................................... 6 4.6.2 Huffman coding mode .................................... 9 5 Bitstream 10 5.1 Configuration Record ......................................... 10 5.1.1 In AVI File Format ...................................... 11 5.1.2 In ISO/IEC 14496-12 (MP4 File Format) ......................... 11 5.1.3 In NUT File Format ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pragmatic Audiovisual Preservation
    http://doi.org/10.7207/twr20-10 Pragmatic Audiovisual Preservation Ashley Blewer DPC Technology Watch Report October 2020 © Digital Preservation Coalition 2020 and Ashley Blewer 2020 ISSN: 2048-7916 DOI: http://doi.org/10.7207/twr20-10 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. The moral rights of the author have been asserted. First published in Great Britain in 2020 by the Digital Preservation Coalition. Pragmatic Audiovisual Preservation Foreword The Digital Preservation Coalition (DPC) is an advocate and catalyst for digital preservation, ensuring our members can deliver resilient long-term access to digital content and services. It is a not-for- profit membership organization whose primary objective is to raise awareness of the importance of the preservation of digital material and the attendant strategic, cultural and technological issues. It supports its members through knowledge exchange, capacity building, assurance, advocacy and partnership. The DPC’s vision is to make our digital memory accessible tomorrow. The DPC Technology Watch Reports identify, delineate, monitor and address topics that have a major bearing on ensuring our collected digital memory will be for the future. They provide an advanced introduction in order to support those charged with ensuring a robust digital memory, and they are of general interest to a wide and international audience with interests in computing, information management, collections management and technology. The reports are commissioned after consultation among DPC members about shared priorities and challenges; they are commissioned from experts; and they are thoroughly scrutinized by peers before being released.
    [Show full text]