Transcript pptx

APT Trustworthy Digital
Repository / Certification
Working Group
Progress Report, October 2015
Stephen Paul Davis, Columbia University Libraries
Why Create a Consortial
Trustworthy Digital Repository?
 To responsibly preserve our cultural record for the future
 To be able to assure donors that their digital and digitized collections will be responsibly
cared for and made available over the long term
 To be able to assure funding agencies that their grants and gifts will yield long-term
benefits
 To make it unnecessary for individual institutions to build separate, standalone
preservation repositories
 To reduce the costs of long-term preservation
What is a TDR? (Reminder)
 A repository that has implemented ISO 14721:2012, Space data and
information transfer systems – Open archival information system (OAIS) –
Reference model
 A repository that is in compliance with ISO 16363:201, Space data and
information transfer systems -- Audit and certification of trustworthy digital
repositories
 A repository that has undergone certification according to ISO 16919:2014,
Requirements for Bodies Providing Audit and Certification of Candidate
Trustworthy Digital Repositories
Key Characteristics of a TDR
Organizational Infrastructure
 Governance and Organizational Viability
 Organizational Structure and Staffing
 Preservation Policy and Framework
 Financial Sustainability
Digital Object Management
 Acquisition of Content
 Creation of Archival Information Package
 Preservation Planning
 Access Management
Infrastructure and Security Risk Management
 Content Replication
 Technology Inventory and Monitoring
 Technical Audits
 Software Replacement and Monitoring
APTrust’s Opportunity
 To build a TDR from the ground up rather than after the fact
 To help shape the technical, policy and organizational framework of APT to
meet the goal of “trustworthiness”
 To save time and money when formal audit and certification is conducted
Which Repositories Have Already Been
Certified?
 Canadiana.org (2015)
 CLOCKSS (2014)
 Scholars Portal (2013)
 Chronopolis (2012)
 Hathitrust (2011)
 Portico (2010)
(Per CRL https://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digitalarchives/certification-assessment -- 10/2/2014)
TDR/Cert Working Group Members
 Sean Crowe, University of Cincinnati ([email protected])
 Bradley Daigle, UVa ([email protected])
 Heidi Dowding, Indiana University ( [email protected] )
 Andrew Hart, UNC ([email protected])
 Kara McClurken, UVa ([email protected])
 Dina Sokolova, Columbia ([email protected])
 Jordon Steele, Johns Hopkins ([email protected])
 Stephen Davis, Columbia, Sub-Group Lead ([email protected])
Working Group Methodology: 2015
 Study ISO 16363: Audit and certification of trustworthy digital repositories
 Identify current APT organizational structure
 Identify highest priority ISO requirements
 Locate and document existing documentation addressing ISO
requirements
 Identify areas where there is no appropriate documentation – or no
appropriate policies, procedures, strategies
 Ask questions, elicit answers, encourage creation of policies, procedures,
strategies and documentation as needed
 Put in place mechanism for change monitoring
TDR / Cert Working Group Tools
 Nancy McGovern’s ISO/TDR Drupal application – AP Trust Edition
https://trac-audit-aptrust.cul.columbia.edu/trac/
 Documentation Library on Google Drive
http://tinyurl.com/APTTDR
Evolving TDR Strategies / Issues
 “Digital Preservation Maturity Model” (Tournesol Consulting)
 “Data Seal of Approval” (Research Data)
 New Standard: ISO 16919:2014, Requirements for Bodies Providing Audit
and Certification of Candidate Trustworthy Digital Repositories
 Critiques of ISO 16363 – e.g., by Seth Anderson, Preservica
 Important for APT to continue environmental scan of evolving TDR practices,
policies, opportunities, initiatives and tooling.
Related Task Areas / Topics for
Discussion
 Does APTrust’s implementation of the OAIS Reference Model conform to
ISO 14721:2012?
 What should depositors’ SIPs include in order to meet OAIS and TDR
requirements?
 What role might APTrust have in supporting the “curation lifecycle”?
 Does the preservation of born-digital content such as institutional records
and research data raise new questions / bring new opportunities?
Proposed Timeframe for TDR/Cert
 2015 November-December: Document Current APTrust
Environment; identify gaps, issues
 2016 January-June: Collaborate to fill gaps, address issues
 2016 June-December: Conduct full self-audit (possibly with outside
consultant)
 2017: Formal ISO 16363 Audit
Current info will be posted to
http://tinyurl.com/APTTDR