Entries Tagged 'Archives' ↓

OCLC's Lorcan Dempsey makes a great point as usual in his post "Making tracks":

In recent presentations, I have been suggesting that libraries will need to adopt more archival skills as they manage digital collections and think about provenance, evidential integrity, and context, and that they will also need to adopt more museum perspectives as they think about how their digital collections work as educational resources, and consider exhibitions and interpretive environments.

ArchivesNext recently discussed Library Journal's annual list of "Movers and Shakers," pondering what a comparable list in the archival profession would look like. For those who don't know, the list recognizes "library advocates, community builders, 2.0 gurus, innovators, marketers, mentors, and problem solvers transforming libraries." After some rumination, ArchivesNext is now calling for nominations to generate a similar list. Do your civic duty and nominate either a project, an individual, or even a situation worthy of this recognition!

I just discovered DataPortability.org through Peter Van Garderen's blog post about it. I was entirely surprised that I'd heard nary a peep about it. Some basic examination (running a WHOIS query on the domain) shows that it's still a fairly new project. I have to say, though, that I'm entirely impressed. Those involved have given a whole lot of thought to how they're going to be doing things, as evidenced by those who have signed up to be involved and the DataPortability Charter. To wit, the Charter's principles tend to speak for themselves:

1. We want sovereignty over the profiles, relationships, content and media we create and maintain.
2. We want open formats, protocols and policies for identity discovery, data import, export and sync.
3. We want to protect user rights and privacy.

4. DataPortability will not inventing any new standards.

Now, naturally they didn't have preservation in mind at first, but as Peter's post notes, it's ripe for that sort of use. This also got me thinking about Dan Chudnov's old brainstorm about blog mirroring using Bittorrent and Atom, too. In particular, note this comment of his:

It's a pretty simple idea: you extend an aggregator system to "archive" entries posted each day into bittorrent files, and then build a secondary system to turn the data distributed over bittorrents back into browseable "blog" mirrors if/when you need to. The best part is that you don't really need any new technology to do it.

I feel like things are coming full circle. I also feel like I could really have fun and find new ways to extend ArchivesBlogs, at least when I finish the other countless little projects that litter my mind. Anybody got some free time they want to contribute?

Many of Web 2.0's detractors argue about it's real value, but given the wildfires in Southern California, I was happy to see it really put to good use. KPBS, a San Diego radio station, has been using Flickr and, even more shocking (at least for some), Twitter as ways to disseminate information and news quickly. The use of Twitter is particularly interesting as it can send out SMS messages. You might recall a few years ago when protesters in the Philippines used SMS to organize political rallies and warn of police retaliation. The California State Library Blog also has provided information from the California State Archivist about archives affected by the fires. In addition, information about disaster recovery for libraries and archives is available both on a regional level by the San Diego/Imperial County Libraries Disaster Response Network and on the state level by the California Preservation Program. Please hold those affected by the fires in your thoughts, and if you can, contact SILDRN or the CPP to help.

ArchivesNext recently discussed the possibility of having some "Archives 2.0"-themed events this summer, and I think it's a great idea. Now, we may not be able to throw something together in time for SAA, but it seems like the idea of at least meeting up informally is percolating. There's a wealth of opportunities available for archives and archivists to improve access to their holdings through social software and the like. My vision, as I said in a comment on the post, would be to end up with an unconference along the lines of a Library Camp (or more generally, a BarCamp), maybe with lightning talks if enough of us have something to show off or talk about. Like Library Camp, I'd like to see a "bridging the gap" session where we learn and share ways about how to talk to IT staff and other stakeholders essential to our ideas taking off. I facilitated a such a session at Library Camp East, and although trying at times, it was really instructive. But really, it's not just about what I want - what do you all want to see at an Archives Camp?

I'm a bit surprised that this hasn't come across anyone's radar, because it seems awfully damn significant to me. According to this post on the A&A listserv by Michael Ravnitzky, the National Archives and Records Administration released an exhaustive database of box holdings of all the Federal Records Centers. He doesn't really say how he obtained this database, but my guess is he just asked based upon his background and interest in public access to government information - I've come across his name on material relating to FOIA before. The file he received from NARA is a 155 MB Microsoft Access database, and soon after he posted about it to the listserv, Jordan Hayes and Phil Lapsley took the opportunity to host the database, converted it to MySQL, and wrote a few simple query forms for the database in PHP. Hayes also provided some basic documentation on how to use the forms since MySQL query syntax is probably not familiar to most people on the A&A list.

While I'm glad to see that this database has been made available, it seems a little strange to me that this appears to be pretty insignificant for NARA. While I don't expect that they'll be posting links to Hayes & Lapsley's query forms, I have yet to find any reference to this database in any form (downloadable or not) on Archives.gov. I'd think any sort of mention would bode well for NARA, so it's a bit puzzling to have it be so overlooked. Maybe we can do more with the data. My first thought was to throw something together and then maybe sacrifice a goat to the fine folks at ibiblio (where ArchivesBlogs is hosted) in exchange for making the database available at a reliable site that works in the public interest. I then wised up and realized that I don't currently have the time to do that alone. If someone's interested, though, I know where you can get goats wholesale.

The files in question:

• Access database (22 MB, compressed)
• MySQL database (16 MB, compressed)
• Query form source code

It's been some time since I've had a substantive post, and I don't really intend to write one now. I figured I should mention, however, that I've been featured lately in print and in the blogosphere. Jessamyn West of librarian.net interviewed me for an article ("Saving Digital History") in Library Journal netConnect. In addition, I was tapped by the wonderful folks at Booktruck for the latest installment in their "Ask a Male Librarian" series. I swear someday soon I'll write something much more interesting and less self-promotional.

A few months ago (while I was at NACO training) I got a reader's card at the Library of Congress. For a while I pretty actively went and requested books on Saturday afternoons. In particular, I was interested in archival manuals from outside the United States. One of the most interesting books I found was S. M. Jaffar's Problems of an Archivist, a manual written in Pakistan in 1948. I was struck by the following passage ("Protection From Human Pests"), taken from pp. 28-29:

"Human pests" and "White Huns" are the common epithets applied to human species acting as enemies of archives. History has recorded many such instances of vandalism as the wholesale destruction of priceless treasures of art and literature, the burning of big and beautiful libraries, the transport of camel-loads of books to distant countries and the sale of valuable manuscripts at ridiculously low prices. The transfer of artistic and literary treasures of subjugated countries by the conquerors to their homelands to adorn their own museums and libraries has depleted those countries of that wealth. In their anti-archival activities insects are impartial, but the human pest or "Homo Sapiens", as he is significantly called, goes for the most precious papers. Being rational, his ravages are more thorough and fatal than those of insect pests. As such he is capable of maximum harm in minimum time, especially when he is selfish, callous, misguided and bent upon mischief. The removal of entire pages ond [sic] pictures from valuable volumes and of seals and signatures of historical persons from rare records is the common experience of archivists and librarians.

An archivist (or a librarian) may rightly with-hold certain classes of documents as being fragile, but he cannot legitimately stand between the research scholar and the primary sources of his information -- the raw materials of history. Damages due to carelessness are also common: By resting his elbows on a batch of brittle papers or by spilling ink on important records, a research student may do incalculable harm. Old but important manuscripts have often been destroyed for want of space or thrown into wells and rivers out of pure piety to prevent their pollution by falling into unclean or impious hands. These are important problems which must be tackled by the authorities and the archivist. In order to ensure that the literary wealth of a country remains within it, it must be free and strong, capable of warding off external danger and guarding its cultural heritage. To prevent the export of valuable records, prohibitory legislation is absolutely essential.* To check damage being done through carelessness, a set of restrictive rules may be framed and enforced in archive offices and libraries. Documents scattered here and there and subject to premature decay and deterioration may be surveyed and salvaged by the state, if not by private enterprise. The archivist can frame and enforce rules within his sphere. Beyond that he is powerless. But he can draw the attention of the authorities to the problems beyond his control and suggest solution [sic].

• That which pertains to a countries past cannot form the exclusive property of a private individual. In its ultimate analysis, it belongs to the whole nation -- the State. The principle applies with equal force to the collections of private owners. Within the country they may form the property of private persons, but their export cannot be tolerated.

First, via my associates at booktruck.org, I came across a review of the comic book Demonslayer v. 2.2, by a certain Marat Mychaels, et al. at Comics Should Be Good. While the fact that the reviewers pan the comic book seems only marginally of interest to those of us wading in archivy, I should draw your attention to a specific part of this issue. Apparently one of the characters goes to visit the Director of Archives at the New York Museum of Natural History, who has chosen to decorate his office in the style of some seemingly life-sized works by (fellow Peruvian) Boris Vallejo.

Secondly, everyone knows how much of a pain digital preservation is, particularly in terms of born-digital cultural materials. So, who should archivists and curators look to for guidance? Kurt Bollacker, digital research manager at the Long Now Foundation (and formerly of the Internet Archive), holds up the pornography industry as a potential leader of the pack. He states that he guarantees "that a wealth of pornography from the late 20th century will survive in digital distributed form (because) it's a social model that's working extremely well." If you read the rest of the article it's not clear if he's talking about just the producers trailblazing these distribution paths or the "consumers" as well (e.g. using peer-to-peer file sharing). Either way, though, I think this idea is a lot like the LOCKSS model for distributed preservation and Dan Chudnov's idea for preserving blogs using METS (or Atom) and BitTorrent. I've intended for a few weeks now to dedicate an entire post to Dan's idea, but after mentioning it in this one I feel like I've covered that sufficiently.

Today, Nancy Beaumont, Executive Director of the Society of American Archivists, made an announcement on the Archives & Archivists listserv that SAA would no longer retain the first thirteen years of posts from the listserv. During this time the listserv was hosted by Miami University of Ohio, and last September, the list was moved to an SAA server. This stems from a decision made by SAA Council that they not retain the archives for three reasons: 1) an appraisal decision informed by the SAA's archives at the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, 2) a consideration of administrative issues, and 3) a consideration of cost.

While the appraisal decision is well-informed by the claim that the list archives do not have evidential value as SAA records, the belief that these records have little informational value does not sit well with me. The list archives document the development of archives becoming a stronger profession in the face of technology and the creation of a tight-knit social network. While not all of the posts are "serious," the discussions themselves are important to preserve as one can see the ways in which archival discourse has changed over time.

The administrative issues stem from legal concerns about copyright and posters wanting certain messages removed. While these concerns also have merit, a great deal of discussion lists have retained their messages for periods even longer than the existence of the A&A list. And finally, in terms of cost, SAA claims that the financial burden would be too much to bear to preserve and maintain the list archives. I find that to be completely ridiculous! Storage costs continue to go down, and even if SAA chose not to make the technical commitment to serving the archives themselves, I'm sure enough interested individuals or organizations could find a way to host the archives themselves. In fact, I'm sure a few technologically inclined archivists have already found a way to capture the list archives without a second thought.

Neither SAA Council nor staff made the effort to let the SAA membership know about the potential plans throught the A&A listserv. While a motion regarding this matter was documented in SAA Council minutes from last August, there was no mention of the creation of any task force to determine the disposition of the list archives. Furthermore, the statement made by Ms. Beaumont claims that the Task Force created reports to justify their decision, but they have yet to be released to the SAA member body for review. Most egregious of all, though, is that SAA Council made this decree less than three weeks before the deletion of the archives from the Miami University listserver. The final version of the motion passed by SAA Council reads:

THAT SAA retain the electronic records of the A&A List archives for a minimum period of two years for the purposes of appraisal based on content analysis, cost of maintenance, and ongoing study of the use of the data.

In all, I find this to be an embarrassment to the profession. How are we to be trusted with retaining the memory of society if we can't even retain our own? I certainly hope there are some enterprising archivists out there that are willing to step up to the plate to find a way to store this data before it gets thrown out all together. Do we have to prove SAA Council wrong, or go against their wishes just to prove a point? In some ways I hope not, but if we must, we should. This is finally getting some good coverage thanks to librarian.net and Boing Boing posting links to Rick Prelinger's post. (Edit: I've been watching Technorati, too - coverage is starting to spread like wildfire!) I certainly it gets more since this appears to be such an egregious violation of the profession's goals and the trust of the SAA members.