DOCSLIB.ORG

Document History 1. Definition of the Subject 2. Keywords

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

State of the Art Report (StoAR) Name: <StoAR_Persistent_Identifiers> Work Package: <Tools> Responsible: <Ahmed Rahali> Document history Date Version Status Author(s) Changes / comments <20.10.2004> 1 In progress ARA <13.01.2005> 1 First version ARA 1. Definition of the subject Persistent identification is regarded as an increasingly important aspect for strategies aimed to ensure effective management of digital information resources and their long-term access. The assignment of unique identifiers allows digital objects to be labelled or referenced in such a way that they can be reliably found over time in a dynamic distributed information environment. To date, various schemes have been suggested as a global approach to persistent identification, including the URN (Uniform Resource Name), the DOI (Digital Object Identifiers), the PURL (Persistent URL), the Handle System, the ARK (Archival Resource Key) and the XRI (eXtensible Resource Identifier). Each of these approaches came to birth as a result of progressive ongoing research and has succeeded, in varying degrees, to build communities around it. This document is aimed to provide an overview of current activity in the field of persistent identifiers and an understanding of the diverse persistent identification strategies being used and developed. The document is to serve as a reference for review and evaluation of all these various schemes and as a basis for recommendations of relevance to the eSciDoc project. 2. Keywords Persistent identifier, Persistent identification, Persistent link, Digital identifier, Persistence, Uniform Resource Name, Uniform Resource Identifier, Uniform Resource Locator, National Bibliography Number, Persistent URL, Handle, Digital Object Identifier, Archival Resource Key, eXtensible Resource Identifier, URI, URL, URN, NBN, PURL, DOI, ARK, infoURI, XRI. 1 Table of contents: Name: <StoAR_Persistent_Identifiers> ..............................................................................................1 Work Package: <Tools>.....................................................................................................................1 Responsible: <Ahmed Rahali> ..........................................................................................................1 Document history ..............................................................................................................................1 1. Definition of the subject ....................................................................................1 2. Keywords............................................................................................................1 3. Summary.............................................................................................................3 4. Third party activities:.........................................................................................4 5. State of the art....................................................................................................5 5.1 Introduction........................................................................................................6 5.1.1 Scope.............................................................................................................................6 5.1.2 Definitions ......................................................................................................................6 5.1.3 Background....................................................................................................................7 5.1.4 Aspects of persistent naming.........................................................................................8 5.2 Functional and Organisational Requirements.................................................8 5.3 Persistent Identification Systems.....................................................................9 5.3.1 Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs)..............................................................................9 5.3.1.1 Uniform Resource Locators (URLs)...............................................................................9 5.3.1.2 Uniform Resource Names (URNs) ..............................................................................10 5.3.2 Persistent Uniform Resource Locators (PURLs) .........................................................12 5.3.3 The Handle System .....................................................................................................13 5.3.4 Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) ...................................................................................17 5.3.5 Archival Resource Keys (ARKs) ..................................................................................19 5.3.6 Other Identifier Schemes .............................................................................................21 5.3.6.1 info Uniform Resource Identifier ( info URI)...................................................................21 5.3.6.2 eXtensible Resource Identifier (XRI) ...........................................................................22 5.3.7 Comparative Summary ................................................................................................22 5.4 Evaluation of Persistent Identification Schemes ..........................................23 5.4.1 Using the URN scheme ...............................................................................................23 5.4.2 Using PURLS...............................................................................................................23 5.4.3 Using Handles..............................................................................................................24 5.4.4 Using DOIs...................................................................................................................24 5.4.5 Using ARKs..................................................................................................................25 5.4.6 Summary......................................................................................................................25 5.5 Ensuring Persistent Access to Resources....................................................26 6. Relevance and conclusions for the project ...................................................27 7. Open questions................................................................................................28 8. References........................................................................................................29 2 3. Summary Persistent identifiers and an associated resolver service are an attempt to solve the common problem of broken links that occurs when resources on the web are moved to a new location or completely removed. Many Persistent Identification approaches have been proposed to tackle this problem by providing both consistent naming scheme for online resources and a resolver service to redirect users to the current location of a resource based on its persistent identifier. The main purpose of this report is to present the current state of technologies that assist the issue of Persistent Identification. Three aspects are taken into consideration: the semantics of the identifier itself, the issue of resolving the identifier to a resource or to further information on how to access the resource (metadata, another file, an html file etc.…) and, finally, recognising the importance of encouraging others to share responsibility for maintaining this access persistent. The schemes that are discussed and that constitute potential options are: the Uniform Resource Name (URN) of the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Persistent URL (PURL) of the Online Computer Library Center, the Handle System of the Corporation for National Research Initiatives, the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the International DOI Foundation and the Archival Resource Key (ARK) of the California Digital Library. The report sums up by defining dealing with the problem of persistence in two dimensions. First, it is supported by technical infrastructure manifested through an implementation based on one of the available systems that meet the requirements. Secondly, it needs to be governed by policies and guidelines that help promoting awareness for commitment to persistence and that encourage institutions and individuals to take responsibility towards guaranteeing the persistence of the resources they own. IMPORTANT: The report makes a couple of recommendations, but these are to be taken with caution as they are neither found on a thoroughly sufficient evaluation against a set of requirements nor based on profound and convincing practical tests. They are, rather, based on impressions and shallow experience gained while having to deal with this topic for the first time. 3 4. Third party activities: Organisation Identification Scheme Status of Activity The Internet Engineering Uniform Resource Names ( URN s) Available/ In Progress Task Force (The URN URN is a namespace of namespaces for URIs. This urn:NBN (RFC3188), in particular is Working Group) includes urn:ISBN (namespace for books), urn:ISBN being used by a number of national (namespace for journals) and urn:NBN (namespace for libraries across Europe. (IETF ) national bibliographic items). Online Computer Library Persistent Uniform Resource Locators ( PURL s) Available Center PURLs are simply URLs which use no new protocols, but A number of resolution servers have a set of tools that provide assistance to maintain URLs been put in place. By May 2004, over (OCLC ) with a commitment
Recommended publications
  • Bibliography of Erik Wilde

    Bibliography of Erik Wilde

    dretbiblio dretbiblio Erik Wilde's Bibliography References [1] AFIPS Fall Joint Computer Conference, San Francisco, California, December 1968. [2] Seventeenth IEEE Conference on Computer Communication Networks, Washington, D.C., 1978. [3] ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, Los Angeles, Cal- ifornia, March 1982. ACM Press. [4] First Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 1986. [5] 1987 ACM Conference on Hypertext, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, November 1987. ACM Press. [6] 18th IEEE International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing, Tokyo, Japan, 1988. IEEE Computer Society Press. [7] Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Portland, Oregon, 1988. ACM Press. [8] Conference on Office Information Systems, Palo Alto, California, March 1988. [9] 1989 ACM Conference on Hypertext, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, November 1989. ACM Press. [10] UNIX | The Legend Evolves. Summer 1990 UKUUG Conference, Buntingford, UK, 1990. UKUUG. [11] Fourth ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Hilton Head, South Carolina, November 1991. [12] GLOBECOM'91 Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, 1991. IEEE Computer Society Press. [13] IEEE INFOCOM '91 Conference on Computer Communications, Bal Harbour, Florida, 1991. IEEE Computer Society Press. [14] IEEE International Conference on Communications, Denver, Colorado, June 1991. [15] International Workshop on CSCW, Berlin, Germany, April 1991. [16] Third ACM Conference on Hypertext, San Antonio, Texas, December 1991. ACM Press. [17] 11th Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, Houston, Texas, 1992. IEEE Computer Society Press. [18] 3rd Joint European Networking Conference, Innsbruck, Austria, May 1992. [19] Fourth ACM Conference on Hypertext, Milano, Italy, November 1992. ACM Press. [20] GLOBECOM'92 Conference, Orlando, Florida, December 1992. IEEE Computer Society Press. http://github.com/dret/biblio (August 29, 2018) 1 dretbiblio [21] IEEE INFOCOM '92 Conference on Computer Communications, Florence, Italy, 1992.
  • ARK Identifier Scheme

    ARK Identifier Scheme

    UC Office of the President CDL Staff Publications Title The ARK Identifier Scheme Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9p9863nc Authors Kunze, John Rodgers, Richard Publication Date 2008-05-22 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Network Preservation Group J. Kunze California Digital Library R. Rodgers US National Library of Medicine May 22, 2008 The ARK Identifier Scheme Abstract The ARK (Archival Resource Key) naming scheme is designed to facilitate the high-quality and persistent identification of information objects. A founding principle of the ARK is that persistence is purely a matter of service and is neither inherent in an object nor conferred on it by a particular naming syntax. The best that an identifier can do is to lead users to the services that support robust reference. The term ARK itself refers both to the scheme and to any single identifier that conforms to it. An ARK has five components: [http://NMAH/]ark:/NAAN/Name[Qualifier] an optional and mutable Name Mapping Authority Hostport (usually a hostname), the "ark:" label, the Name Assigning Authority Number (NAAN), the assigned Name, and an optional and possibly mutable Qualifier supported by the NMA. The NAAN and Name together form the immutable persistent identifier for the object independent of the URL hostname. An ARK is a special kind of URL that connects users to three things: the named object, its metadata, and the provider's promise about its persistence. When entered into the location field of a Web browser, the ARK leads the user to the named object.
  • UK Research Data Registry Mapping Schemes

    UK Research Data Registry Mapping Schemes

    UK Research Data Registry Mapping Schemes Project Information Project Identifier PID TBC Project Title UK Research Data (Metadata) Registry Pilot Project Hashtag #jiscrdr Start Date 1 October 2013 End Date 31 March 2014 Lead Institution Jisc Project Director Rachel Bruce Project Manager — Contact Email — Partner Institutions Digital Curation Centre (Universities of Edinburgh, Glasgow, Bath); UKDA (University of Essex) Project Webpage URL http://www.dcc.ac.uk/projects/research-data-registry-pilot Programme Name Jisc Capital Programme Document Information Author(s) and Role(s) Alex Ball (Metadata Coordinator) Date 12 May 2014 Project Refs T3.1; D3.1 Filename uk-rdr-mapping-v09.pdf URL http://www.dcc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/ registry/uk-rdr-mapping-v09.pdf Access This report is for general dissemination Document History Version Date Comments 01 29 November 2013 Summary of RIF-CS. First draft of DDI mapping. 02 8 January 2014 Second draft of DDI mapping. First draft of DataCite mapping. 03 22 January 2014 New introduction. Expanded summary of RIF-CS. First draft of EPrints ReCollect, NERC Discovery, and OAI-PMH Dublin Core mappings. 04 23 January 2014 Section on tips for contributors. 05 31 January 2014 Second draft of NERC Discovery (UK GEMINI), EPrints mappings. 06 12 February 2014 Third draft of DDI mapping. 07 18 March 2014 Corrections to all mappings in the light of codification. 08 21 March 2014 First draft of MODS mapping. Registry quality levels included. 09 9 May 2014 Fixed small errors. Added MODS elements to tips section. 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Typographical conventions .
  • Describing Data Patterns. a General Deconstruction of Metadata Standards

    Describing Data Patterns. a General Deconstruction of Metadata Standards

    Describing Data Patterns A general deconstruction of metadata standards Dissertation in support of the degree of Doctor philosophiae (Dr. phil.) by Jakob Voß submitted at January 7th 2013 defended at May 31st 2013 at the Faculty of Philosophy I Humboldt-University Berlin Berlin School of Library and Information Science Reviewer: Prof. Dr. Stefan Gradman Prof. Dr. Felix Sasaki Prof. William Honig, PhD This document is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike license (CC-BY-SA). Feel free to reuse any parts of it as long as attribution is given to Jakob Voß and the result is licensed under CC-BY-SA as well. The full source code of this document, its variants and corrections are available at https://github.com/jakobib/phdthesis2013. Selected parts and additional content are made available at http://aboutdata.org A digital copy of this thesis (with same pagination but larger margins to fit A4 paper format) is archived at http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/. A printed version is published through CreateSpace and available by Amazon and selected distributors. ISBN-13: 978-1-4909-3186-9 ISBN-10: 1-4909-3186-4 Cover: the Arecibo message, sent into empty space in 1974 (image CC-BY-SA Arne Nordmann, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arecibo_message.svg) CC-BY-SA by Widder (2010) Abstract Many methods, technologies, standards, and languages exist to structure and de- scribe data. The aim of this thesis is to find common features in these methods to determine how data is actually structured and described. Existing studies are limited to notions of data as recorded observations and facts, or they require given structures to build on, such as the concept of a record or the concept of a schema.
  • Index of /Sites/Default/Al Direct/2007/April

    Index of /Sites/Default/Al Direct/2007/April

    AL Direct, April 4, 2007 Contents U.S. & World News ALA News Booklist Online D.C. Update Division News Round Table News Awards Seen Online Tech Talk April 4, 2007 Actions & Answers Poll Calendar U.S. & World News Axed library media teachers protest reassignment School librarians and their boosters are protesting a March 13 decision by the board of the Madera (Calif.) Unified School District to eliminate entirely as of the 2007–2008 academic year the category of library media teacher from its roster of certificated posts and to reassign to classrooms the four media specialists who serve MUSD’s three middle schools and two high schools.... Is accessibility a Salt Lake County rescinds “One Book” concern for you? Find selection, author invitation out how to meet your Two weeks after he was notified in January that his communication or 2004 novel An Unfinished Life had been selected by physical requirements. Salt Lake County (Utah) Library Services for its “One County, One Book” reading program, author Mark Spragg received an e-mail from the library informing him that the book’s selection and the library’s invitation to speak at an October event had been rescinded.... ALA News ALA to co-sponsor advocacy programs at TLA Annual Conference In partnership with Texas Library Association and Texas Woman’s University, ALA will co- sponsor two advocacy programs on Thursday, April 12, during TLA’s Annual Conference held April 11-14, in San Antonio. The programs Getting teens to read —“The ABCs of Advocacy” and “Creating Advocacy Leaders: An for fun is the ultimate Advocacy Institute Program”—are part of ALA’s Advocacy Institute challenge, yet research initiative...
  • Access Interfaces for Open Archival Information Systems Based on the OAI-PMH and the Openurl Framework for Context-Sensitive Services

    Access Interfaces for Open Archival Information Systems Based on the OAI-PMH and the Openurl Framework for Context-Sensitive Services

    Access Interfaces for Open Archival Information Systems based on the OAI-PMH and the OpenURL Framework for Context-Sensitive Services Jeroen Bekaert1,2, and Herbert Van de Sompel1 1 Digital Library Research & Prototyping Team, Los Alamos National Laboratory, MS P362, PO Box 1663, Los Alamos, NM 87544-7113, US {jbekaert, herbertv}@lanl.gov 2 Dept. of Architecture and Urbanism, Faculty of Engineering, Ghent University, Jozef-Plateaustraat 22, 9000 Gent, Belgium {jeroen.bekaert}@ugent.be Abstract. In recent years, a variety of digital repository and archival systems have been developed and adopted. All of these systems aim at hosting a variety of compound digital assets and at providing tools for storing, managing and accessing those assets. This paper will focus on the definition of common and standardized access interfaces that could be deployed across such diverse digital respository and archival systems. The proposed interfaces are based on the two formal specifications that have recently emerged from the Digital Library community: The Open Archive Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) and the NISO OpenURL Framework for Context-Sensitive Services (OpenURL Standard). As will be described, the former allows for the retrieval of batches of XML-based representations of digital assets, while the latter facilitates the retrieval of disseminations of a specific digital asset or of one or more of its constituents. The core properties of the proposed interfaces are explained in terms of the Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS). 1. Introduction The Open Archival Information System (OAIS) Reference Model [1] addresses a wide range of information preservation functions, including ingest, storage, management, and access.
  • State of the Art and Guidelines for Standards Applicable Edition 1

    State of the Art and Guidelines for Standards Applicable Edition 1

    D4.1 State of the art and guidelines for standards applicable – Ed.1 Grant Agreement ECP-2007-DILI-527003 ARROW State of the art and guidelines for standards applicable Edition 1 Deliverable number D4.1 Dissemination level Public Delivery date 30 July 2009 Status Final Author(s) EDItEUR eContentplus This project is funded under the eContentplus programme a multiannual Community programme to make digital content in Europe more accessible, usable and exploitable. 1/70 A map of standards with relevance to the ARROW project Introduction This document was commissioned by the ARROW project from EDItEUR (the London‐based international organization for book trade standards). It is intended to provide a “state of the art” description of standards which might have specific application within the ARROW project. The document considers a wide range of metadata, identification, messaging and search‐ related standards, selected on the basis of their potential application to ARROW. The initial list of standards to be covered was provided by ARROW to EDItEUR, and was supplemented by EDItEUR with additional standards which appeared to be relevant. Which of these standards will actually be implemented within eth “ARROW system”, or precisely where they may fit into the overall scheme, is not currently known, but will become clearer as architectural and other issues are resolved. At least one further release of this document (incorporating comments from the wider membership of the ARROW time, as well as a mapping of standards to the final ARROW technical architecture)
  • Describing Data Patterns. a General Deconstruction of Metadata Standards 2013

    Describing Data Patterns. a General Deconstruction of Metadata Standards 2013

    Repositorium für die Medienwissenschaft Jakob Voß Describing Data Patterns. A general deconstruction of metadata standards 2013 https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/4151 Veröffentlichungsversion / published version Hochschulschrift / academic publication Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Voß, Jakob: Describing Data Patterns. A general deconstruction of metadata standards. Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/4151. Erstmalig hier erschienen / Initial publication here: https://doi.org/10.18452/16794 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Creative Commons - This document is made available under a creative commons - Namensnennung - Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 4.0/ Attribution - Share Alike 4.0/ License. For more information see: Lizenz zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu dieser Lizenz https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ finden Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ Describing Data Patterns A general deconstruction of metadata standards Dissertation in support of the degree of Doctor philosophiae (Dr. phil.) by Jakob Voß submitted at January 7th 2013 defended at May 31st 2013 at the Faculty of Philosophy I Humboldt-University Berlin Berlin School of Library and Information Science Reviewer: Prof. Dr. Stefan Gradman Prof. Dr. Felix Sasaki Prof. William Honig, PhD This document is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike license (CC-BY-SA). Feel free to reuse any parts of it as long as attribution is given to Jakob Voß and the result is licensed under CC-BY-SA as well. The full source code of this document, its variants and corrections are available at https://github.com/jakobib/phdthesis2013.
  • LCC Principles of Identification V1 1 April 2014 with Appendices

    LCC Principles of Identification V1 1 April 2014 with Appendices

    Linked Content Coalition Principles of Identification v1.1 Principles of identification Version 1.1, April 2014 Editors Norman Paskin ( [email protected] ), Godfrey Rust ( [email protected] ) An identifier is a name which is unique within its type and domain. This document comprises the LCC recommendations for the design and use of identifiers within the digital network in the content and rights supply chain. Detailed support for the recommendations is provided in the attached appendixes. These recommendations are presented as a model of best practise for identification to support the highest level of automation, interoperability, trust and accuracy within the network. They are not mandatory in the sense that none is legally or systematically enforceable for all identifier types, and failure to comply will not normally block the supply chain entirely, but make its operation more time- consuming, labour-intensive and error-prone. “The digital network” here includes, but is not limited to, the internet. 1 Entities: what should be identified? Public, persistent identification of key supply chain entities is essential. • Each entity which needs to be recognised distinctly in the digital network should be assigned at least one persistent public identifier so that it may be denoted unambiguously wherever that is required or useful. The entity denoted by an identifier is known as its referent. • A public identifier is one that is accessible and recognisable by people or machines within the digital network. • Key entities which require identifiers include each item of content (“ creation ”) which needs to be recognised (at whatever level of granularity is required), and each party (person or organization) who is recognised as, or claims to be, a contributor or rightsholder of content or an asserter of metadata.
  • Internet Bible As Is...(April 2011)

    Internet Bible As Is...(April 2011)

    * * * 1:1 [kjv] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [bbe] From the first he was the Word, and the Word was in relation with God and was God. 1:2 [kjv] The same was in the beginning with God. [bbe] This Word was from the first in relation with God. 1:3 [kjv] All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. The Gospel from John, New Testament, The Holy Bible In computing, word is a term for the natural unit of data used by a particular computer design. A word is simply a fixed sized group of bits that are handled together by the system. The number of bits in a word (the word size or word length) is an important characteristic of computer architecture. The size of a word is reflected in many aspects of a computer's structure and operation; the majority of the registers in the computer are usually word sized and the amount of data transferred between the processing part computer and the memory system, in a single operation, is most often a word. The largest possible address size, used to designate a location in memory, is typically a hardware word (in other words, the full-sized natural word of the processor, as opposed to any other definition used on the platform). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_(computing) Internet Bible as is....(April 2011) It was compiled and written by Igor ([email protected], http://www.appservgrid.com) on 04/07/2011 year of Anno Domini 0/0/42 years ACE (after Common Era appearing of RFC-1 at 04/07/1969 A.D.) at the Town like "Holy Sacrament" and "Es como el sagrado sacramento" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramento,_California ) in honour of names of greatest Vinton Gray Cerf and Tim Berners-Lee and thousands others.
  • LCC Identifiers Workstream Paper V0 2 Nov 7 2012

    LCC Identifiers Workstream Paper V0 2 Nov 7 2012

    Linked Content Coalition LCC identifiers specification v0.2 LCC Identifiers workstream Identifiers specification Version 0.2 | November 2012 These are the identifier specifications recommended for LCC. Detailed support for the recommendations is provided in the attached appendix. 1. Identification is essential • Each entity which needs to be recognised distinctly in the network should have at least one public identifier. • Types of entities here include those identified in the LCC Rights Reference Model: Party, Creation, Place, Context, Right, RightsAssignment, Assertion, RightsConflict . • In particular, this includes each item of content which needs to be recognised (at whatever level of granularity is required), and each person or organization who is recognised as (or claims to be) a contributor or rightsholder of content (an "interested party"). • A public identifier is not necessarily humanly readable: "public" means that it is accessible to people or machines within the network. 2. Identifiers should be resolvable • A resolvable identifier in the digital network is one that enables a system to locate the identified resource, or some metadata or service related to it, elsewhere in the network. • Because the World Wide Web is the dominant network using the Internet, then it is a minimum requirement to support that, and a potential requirement to support other networks. This in effect recognises the URI as a practical common framework for global digital content identification. First class identifiers may still be used where appropriate and expressed as URIs where necessary. The URI syntax can incorporate existing standard or proprietary identifiers while remaining globally unique, and much technology already exists for recognising and resolving URIs in various ways.
  • Options for Improving Access to Legislative Records: a White Paper

    Options for Improving Access to Legislative Records: a White Paper

    Preserving State Government Digital Information Minnesota Historical Society Options for Improving Access to Legislative Records: A White Paper Abstract Access to information has been greatly enhanced by the ubiquity of the web. But there are limitations that impede even greater access. Information stored in proprietary formats or dynamically generated content may be unreadable by web search engines, thus making certain web content invisible to searchers. Persons using assistive technologies may have difficulty interpreting certain content elements. Approaches to making records accessible are compared and relative strengths and weaknesses of selected tools and file formats discussed. Ways to facilitate aggregation and analysis which can improve access while leveraging user-created value are also considered. Any comments, corrections, or recommendations may be sent to the project team, care of: Nancy Hoffman Project Analyst Minnesota Historical Society [email protected] / 651.259.3367 Overview of Access Considerations Legislative records that are only available in paper form clearly limits access to those citizens who can get their hands on a copy of the printed document. Now that the internet “has become the de- facto platform of interoperability and search engines have emerged as primary information portals,” 1 information made available on the web offers the promise of making these same documents and data easier to obtain and use. Electronic records may still pose serious barriers to access and use. They will have many of the same limitations as paper records if they are only held on internal network systems and not made available on the web. Even exposing records on the internet will not automatically make them easy to find and use.