“Digital preservation”的意思、由来-开放百科全书

In library and archival science, digital preservation is a formal endeavor to ensure that digital information of continuing value remains accessible and usable.^[1] It involves planning, resource allocation, and application of preservation methods and technologies,^[2] and it combines policies, strategies and actions to ensure access to reformatted and "born-digital" content, regardless of the challenges of media failure and technological change. The goal of digital preservation is the accurate rendering of authenticated content over time.^[3]

The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Preservation and Reformatting Section of the American Library Association, defined digital preservation as combination of "policies, strategies and actions that ensure access to digital content over time."^[4] According to the Harrod's Librarian Glossary, digital preservation is the method of keeping digital material alive so that they remain usable as technological advances render original hardware and software specification obsolete.^[5]

Fundamentals

Appraisal

Archival appraisal (or, alternatively, selection^[6]) refers to the process of identifying records and other materials to be preserved by determining their permanent value. Several factors are usually considered when making this decision.^[7] It is a difficult and critical process because the remaining selected records will shape researchers' understanding of that body of records, or fonds. Appraisal is identified as A4.2 within the Chain of Preservation (COP) model^[8] created by the InterPARES 2 project.^[9] Archival appraisal is not the same as monetary appraisal, which determines fair market value.

Archival appraisal may be performed once or at the various stages of acquisition and processing. Macro appraisal,^[10] a functional analysis of records at a high level, may be performed even before the records have been acquired to determine which records to acquire. More detailed, iterative appraisal may be performed while the records are being processed.

Appraisal is performed on all archival materials, not just digital. It has been proposed that, in the digital context, it might be desirable to retain more records than have traditionally been retained after appraisal of analog records, primarily due to a combination of the declining cost of storage and the availability of sophisticated discovery tools which will allow researchers to find value in records of low information density.^[11]^[12] In the analog context, these records may have been discarded or only a representative sample kept. However, the selection, appraisal, and prioritization of materials must be carefully considered in relation to the ability of an organization to responsibly manage the totality of these materials.

Often libraries, and to a lesser extent, archives, are offered the same materials in several different digital or analog formats. They prefer to select the format that they feel has the greatest potential for long-term preservation of the content. The Library of Congress has created a set of recommended formats for long-term preservation.^[13] They would be used, for example, if the Library was offered items for copyright deposit directly from a publisher.

Identification (identifiers and descriptive metadata)

In digital preservation and collection management, discovery and identification of objects is aided by the use of assigned identifiers and accurate descriptive metadata. An identifier is a unique label that is used to reference an object or record, usually manifested as a number or string of numbers and letters. As a crucial element of metadata to be included in a database record or inventory, it is used in tandem with other descriptive metadata to differentiate objects and their various instantiations.^[14]

Descriptive metadata refers to information about an object's content such as title, creator, subject, date etc...^[14] Determination of the elements used to describe an object are facilitated by the use of a metadata schema.

Another common type of file identification is the filename. Implementing a file naming protocol is essential to maintaining consistency and efficient discovery and retrieval of objects in a collection, and is especially applicable during digitization of analog media. Using a file naming convention, such as the 8.3 filename, will ensure compatibility with other systems and facilitate migration of data, and deciding between descriptive (containing descriptive words and numbers) and non-descriptive (often randomly generated numbers) file names is generally determined by the size and scope of a given collection.^[15] However, filenames are not good for semantic identification, because they are non-permanent labels for a specific location on a system and can be modified without affecting the bit-level profile of a digital file.

Integrity

The cornerstone of digital preservation, "data integrity" refers to the assurance that the data is "complete and unaltered in all essential respects"; a program designed to maintain integrity aims to "ensure data is recorded exactly as intended, and upon later retrieval, ensure the data is the same as it was when it was originally recorded".^[16]

Unintentional changes to data are to be avoided, and responsible strategies put in place to detect unintentional changes and react as appropriately determined. However, digital preservation efforts may necessitate modifications to content or metadata through responsibly-developed procedures and by well-documented policies. Organizations or individuals may choose to retain original, integrity-checked versions of content and/or modified versions with appropriate preservation metadata. Data integrity practices also apply to modified versions, as their state of capture must be maintained and resistant to unintentional modifications.

Fixity

File fixity is the property of a digital file being fixed, or unchanged. File fixity checking is the process of validating that a file has not changed or been altered from a previous state.^[17] This effort is often enabled by the creation, validation, and management of checksums.

While checksums are the primary mechanism for monitoring fixity at the individual file level, an important additional consideration for monitoring fixity is file attendance. Whereas checksums identify if a file has changed, file attendance identifies if a file in a designated collection is newly created, deleted, or moved. Tracking and reporting on file attendance is a fundamental component of digital collection management and fixity.

Characterization

Characterization of digital materials is the identification and description of what a file is and of its defining technical characteristics ^[18] often captured by technical metadata, which records its technical attributes like creation or production environment.^[19]

Sustainability

Digital sustainability encompasses a range of issues and concerns that contribute to the longevity of digital information.^[20] Unlike traditional, temporary strategies, and more permanent solutions, digital sustainability implies a more active and continuous process. Digital sustainability concentrates less on the solution and technology and more on building an infrastructure and approach that is flexible with an emphasis on interoperability, continued maintenance and continuous development.^[21] Digital sustainability incorporates activities in the present that will facilitate access and availability in the future.^[22]^[23] The ongoing maintenance necessary to digital preservation is analogous to the successful, centuries-old, community upkeep of the Uffington White Horse (according to Stuart M. Shieber) or the Ise Grand Shrine (according to Jeffrey Schnapp).^[24]^[25]

Renderability

Renderability refers to the continued ability to use and access a digital object while maintaining its inherent significant properties.^[26]

Physical media obsolescence

Format obsolescence

File format obsolescence can occur when adoption of new encoding formats supersedes use of existing formats, or when associated presentation tools are no longer readily available.^[27]

Factors that should enter consideration when selecting sustainable file formats include disclosure, adoption, transparency, self-documentation, external dependencies, impact of patents, and technical protection mechanisms.^[28]

Formats proprietary to one software vendor are more likely to be affected by format obsolescence. Well-used standards such as Unicode and JPEG are more likely to be readable in future.

Significant properties

Significant properties refer to the "essential attributes of a digital object which affect its appearance, behavior, quality and usability" and which "must be preserved over time for the digital object to remain accessible and meaningful."^[29]

"Proper understanding of the significant properties of digital objects is critical to establish best practice approaches to digital preservation. It assists appraisal and selection, processes in which choices are made about which significant properties of digital objects are worth preserving; it helps the development of preservation metadata, the assessment of different preservation strategies and informs future work on developing common standards across the preservation community."^[30]

Authenticity

Whether analog or digital, archives strive to maintain records as trustworthy representations of what was originally received. Authenticity has been defined as ". . . the trustworthiness of a record as a record; i.e., the quality of a record that is what it purports to be and that is free from tampering or corruption".^[31] Authenticity should not be confused with accuracy;^[32] an inaccurate record may be acquired by an archives and have its authenticity preserved. The content and meaning of that inaccurate record will remain unchanged.

A combination of policies, security procedures, and documentation can be used to ensure and provide evidence that the meaning of the records has not been altered while in the archives' custody.

Access

Digital preservation efforts are largely to enable decision-making in the future. Should an archive or library choose a particular strategy to enact, the content and associated metadata must persist to allow for actions to be taken or not taken at the discretion of the controlling party.

Preservation metadata

Preservation metadata is a key component of digital preservation, and includes information that documents the preservation process. It supports collection management practices and allows organizations or individuals to understand the chain of custody. Preservation Metadata: Implementation Strategies (PREMIS), an international working group, sought to "define implementable, core preservation metadata, with guidelines/recommendations" to support digital preservation efforts by clarifying what the metadata is and its usage.

Intellectual foundations

Preserving Digital Information (1996)

The challenges of long-term preservation of digital information have been recognized by the archival community for years.^[33] In December 1994, the Research Libraries Group (RLG) and Commission on Preservation and Access (CPA) formed a Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information with the main purpose of investigating what needed to be done to ensure long-term preservation and continued access to the digital records. The final report published by the Task Force (Garrett, J. and Waters, D., ed. (1996). "Preserving digital information: Report of the task force on archiving of digital information."^[34]) became a fundamental document in the field of digital preservation that helped set out key concepts, requirements, and challenges.^[33]^[35]

The Task Force proposed development of a national system of digital archives that would take responsibility for long-term storage and access to digital information; introduced the concept of trusted digital repositories and defined their roles and responsibilities; identified five features of digital information integrity (content, fixity, reference, provenance, and context) that were subsequently incorporated into a definition of Preservation Description Information in the Open Archival Information System Reference Model; and defined migration as a crucial function of digital archives. The concepts and recommendations outlined in the report laid a foundation for subsequent research and digital preservation initiatives.^[36]^[37]

OAIS

To standardize digital preservation practice and provide a set of recommendations for preservation program implementation, the Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS) was developed. OAIS is concerned with all technical aspects of a digital object's life cycle: ingest, archival storage, data management, administration, access and preservation planning.^[38] The model also addresses metadata issues and recommends that five types of metadata be attached to a digital object: reference (identification) information, provenance (including preservation history), context, fixity (authenticity indicators), and representation (formatting, file structure, and what "imparts meaning to an object's bitstream").^[39]

Trusted Digital Repository Model

In March 2000, the Research Libraries Group (RLG) and Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) began a collaboration to establish attributes of a digital repository for research organizations, building on and incorporating the emerging international standard of the Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS). In 2002, they published "Trusted Digital Repositories: Attributes and Responsibilities." In that document a "Trusted Digital Repository" (TDR) is defined as "one whose mission is to provide reliable, long-term access to managed digital resources to its designated community, now and in the future." The TDR must include the following seven attributes: compliance with the reference model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS), administrative responsibility, organizational viability, financial sustainability, technological and procedural suitability, system security, procedural accountability. The Trusted Digital Repository Model outlines relationships among these attributes. The report also recommended the collaborative development of digital repository certifications, models for cooperative networks, and sharing of research and information on digital preservation with regard to intellectual property rights.^[40]

In 2004 Henry M. Gladney proposed another approach to digital object preservation that called for the creation of "Trustworthy Digital Objects" (TDOs). TDOs are digital objects that can speak to their own authenticity since they incorporate a record maintaining their use and change history, which allows the future users to verify that the contents of the object are valid.^[41]

InterPARES

International Research on Permanent Authentic Records in Electronic Systems (InterPARES) is a collaborative research initiative led by the University of British Columbia that is focused on addressing issues of long-term preservation of authentic digital records. The research is being conducted by focus groups from various institutions in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia, with an objective of developing theories and methodologies that provide the basis for strategies, standards, policies, and procedures necessary to ensure the trustworthiness, reliability, and accuracy of digital records over time.^[42]

Under the direction of archival science professor Luciana Duranti, the project began in 1999 with the first phase, InterPARES 1, which ran to 2001 and focused on establishing requirements for authenticity of inactive records generated and maintained in large databases and document management systems created by government agencies.^[43] InterPARES 2 (2002–2007) concentrated on issues of reliability, accuracy and authenticity of records throughout their whole life cycle, and examined records produced in dynamic environments in the course of artistic, scientific and online government activities.^[44] The third five-year phase (InterPARES 3) was initiated in 2007. Its goal is to utilize theoretical and methodological knowledge generated by InterPARES and other preservation research projects for developing guidelines, action plans, and training programs on long-term preservation of authentic records for small and medium-sized archival organizations.^[45]

Challenges

Society's heritage has been presented on many different materials, including stone, vellum, bamboo, silk, and paper. Now a large quantity of information exists in digital forms, including emails, blogs, social networking websites, national elections websites, web photo albums, and sites which change their content over time.^[46] With digital media it is easier to create content and keep it up-to-date, but at the same time there are many challenges in the preservation of this content, both technical and economic.^[47]

Unlike traditional analog objects such as books or photographs where the user has unmediated access to the content, a digital object always needs a software environment to render it. These environments keep evolving and changing at a rapid pace, threatening the continuity of access to the content.^[48] Physical storage media, data formats, hardware, and software all become obsolete over time, posing significant threats to the survival of the content.^[3] This process can be referred to as digital obsolescence.

In the case of born-digital content (e.g., institutional archives, Web sites, electronic audio and video content, born-digital photography and art, research data sets, observational data), the enormous and growing quantity of content presents significant scaling issues to digital preservation efforts. Rapidly changing technologies can hinder digital preservationists work and techniques due to outdated and antiquated machines or technology. This has become a common problem and one that is a constant worry for a digital archivist—how to prepare for the future.

Digital content can also present challenges to preservation because of its complex and dynamic nature, e.g., interactive Web pages,^[49] virtual reality and gaming environments,^[53] learning objects, social media sites.^[50] In many cases of emergent technological advances there are substantial difficulties in maintaining the authenticity, fixity, and integrity of objects over time deriving from the fundamental issue of experience with that particular digital storage medium and while particular technologies may prove to be more robust in terms of storage capacity, there are issues in securing a framework of measures to ensure that the object remains fixed while in stewardship.^[2]^[51]

For the preservation of software as digital content, a specific challenge is the typically non-availability of the source code as commercial software is normally distributed only in compiled binary form. Without the source code an adaption (Porting) on modern computing hardware or operating system is most often impossible, therefore the original hardware and software context needs to be emulated. Another potential challenge for software preservation can be the copyright which prohibits often the bypassing of copy protection mechanisms (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) in case software has become an orphaned work (Abandonware). An exemption from the United States Digital Millennium Copyright Act to permit to bypass copy protection was approved in 2003 for a period of 3 years to the Internet Archive who created an archive of "vintage software", as a way to preserve them.^[52]^[53] The exemption was renewed in 2006, and {{As of|2009|October|27|lc=on}}, has been indefinitely extended pending further rulemakings^[54] "for the purpose of preservation or archival reproduction of published digital works by a library or archive."^[55]

Another challenge surrounding preservation of digital content resides in the issue of scale. The amount of digital information being created along with the "proliferation of format types" ^[2] makes creating trusted digital repositories with adequate and sustainable resources a challenge. The Web is only one example of what might be considered the "data deluge".^[2] For example, the Library of Congress currently amassed 170 billion tweets between 2006 and 2010 totaling 133.2 terabytes^[56] and each Tweet is composed of 50 fields of metadata.^[57]

The economic challenges of digital preservation are also great. Preservation programs require significant up front investment to create, along with ongoing costs for data ingest, data management, data storage, and staffing. One of the key strategic challenges to such programs is the fact that, while they require significant current and ongoing funding, their benefits accrue largely to future generations.^[58]

Strategies

In 2006, the Online Computer Library Center developed a four-point strategy for the long-term preservation of digital objects that consisted of:

There are several additional strategies that individuals and organizations may use to actively combat the loss of digital information.

Refreshing

Refreshing is the transfer of data between two types of the same storage medium so there are no bitrot changes or alteration of data.^[39] For example, transferring census data from an old preservation CD to a new one. This strategy may need to be combined with migration when the software or hardware required to read the data is no longer available or is unable to understand the format of the data. Refreshing will likely always be necessary due to the deterioration of physical media.

Migration

Replication

Creating duplicate copies of data on one or more systems is called replication. Data that exists as a single copy in only one location is highly vulnerable to software or hardware failure, intentional or accidental alteration, and environmental catastrophes like fire, flooding, etc. Digital data is more likely to survive if it is replicated in several locations. Replicated data may introduce difficulties in refreshing, migration, versioning, and access control since the data is located in multiple places.

Understanding digital preservation means comprehending how digital information is produced and reproduced. Because digital information (e.g., a file) can be exactly replicated down to the bit level, it is possible to create identical copies of data. Exact duplicates allow archives and libraries to manage, store, and provide access to identical copies of data across multiple systems and/or environments.

Emulation

Emulation is the replicating of functionality of an obsolete system. According to van der Hoeven, "Emulation does not focus on the digital object, but on the hard- and software environment in which the object is rendered. It aims at (re)creating the environment in which the digital object was originally created."^[61] Examples are having the ability to replicate or imitate another operating system.^[62] Examples include emulating an Atari 2600 on a Windows system or emulating WordPerfect 1.0 on a Macintosh. Emulators may be built for applications, operating systems, or hardware platforms. Emulation has been a popular strategy for retaining the functionality of old video game systems, such as with the MAME project. The feasibility of emulation as a catch-all solution has been debated in the academic community. (Granger, 2000)

Raymond A. Lorie has suggested a Universal Virtual Computer (UVC) could be used to run any software in the future on a yet unknown platform.^[63] The UVC strategy uses a combination of emulation and migration. The UVC strategy has not yet been widely adopted by the digital preservation community.

Jeff Rothenberg, a major proponent of Emulation for digital preservation in libraries, working in partnership with Koninklijke Bibliotheek and National Archief of the Netherlands, developed a software program called Dioscuri, a modular emulator that succeeds in running MS-DOS, WordPerfect 5.1, DOS games, and more.^[64]

Another example of emulation as a form of digital preservation can be seen in the example of Emory University and the Salman Rushdie's papers. Rushdie donated an outdated computer to the Emory University library, which was so old that the library was unable to extract papers from the harddrive. In order to procure the papers, the library emulated the old software system and was able to take the papers off his old computer.^[65]

Encapsulation

This method maintains that preserved objects should be self-describing, virtually "linking content with all of the information required for it to be deciphered and understood".^[2] The files associated with the digital object would have details of how to interpret that object by using "logical structures called "containers" or "wrappers" to provide a relationship between all information components^[66] that could be used in future development of emulators, viewers or converters through machine readable specifications.^[67] The method of encapsulation is usually applied to collections that will go unused for long periods of time.^[67]

Persistent archives concept

Developed by the San Diego Supercomputing Center and funded by the National Archives and Records Administration, this method requires the development of comprehensive and extensive infrastructure that enables "the preservation of the organisation of collection as well as the objects that make up that collection, maintained in a platform independent form".^[2] A persistent archive includes both the data constituting the digital object and the context that the defines the provenance, authenticity, and structure of the digital entities.^[68] This allows for the replacement of hardware or software components with minimal effect on the preservation system. This method can be based on virtual data grids and resembles OAIS Information Model (specifically the Archival Information Package).

Metadata attachment

Metadata is data on a digital file that includes information on creation, access rights, restrictions, preservation history, and rights management.^[69] Metadata attached to digital files may be affected by file format obsolescence. ASCII is considered to be the most durable format for metadata ^[70] because it is widespread, backwards compatible when used with Unicode, and utilizes human-readable characters, not numeric codes. It retains information, but not the structure information it is presented in. For higher functionality, SGML or XML should be used. Both markup languages are stored in ASCII format, but contain tags that denote structure and format.

Preservation repository assessment and certification

A few of the major frameworks for digital preservation repository assessment and certification are described below. A more detailed list is maintained by the U.S. Center for Research Libraries.^[71]

Specific tools and methodologies

TRAC

In 2007, CRL/OCLC published Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria & Checklist (TRAC), a document allowing digital repositories to assess their capability to reliably store, migrate, and provide access to digital content. TRAC is based upon existing standards and best practices for trustworthy digital repositories and incorporates a set of 84 audit and certification criteria arranged in three sections: Organizational Infrastructure; Digital Object Management; and Technologies, Technical Infrastructure, and Security.^[72]

TRAC "provides tools for the audit, assessment, and potential certification of digital repositories, establishes the documentation requirements required for audit, delineates a process for certification, and establishes appropriate methodologies for determining the soundness and sustainability of digital repositories".^[73]

DRAMBORA

Digital Repository Audit Method Based On Risk Assessment (DRAMBORA), introduced by the Digital Curation Centre (DCC) and DigitalPreservationEurope (DPE) in 2007, offers a methodology and a toolkit for digital repository risk assessment.^[74] The tool enables repositories to either conduct the assessment in-house (self-assessment) or to outsource the process.

The DRAMBORA process is arranged in six stages and concentrates on the definition of mandate, characterization of asset base, identification of risks and the assessment of likelihood and potential impact of risks on the repository. The auditor is required to describe and document the repository's role, objectives, policies, activities and assets, in order to identify and assess the risks associated with these activities and assets and define appropriate measures to manage them.^[75]

European Framework for Audit and Certification of Digital Repositories

The [https://web.archive.org/web/20121115012739/http://www.trusteddigitalrepository.eu/Site/Trusted%20Digital%20Repository.html European Framework for Audit and Certification of Digital Repositories] was defined in a memorandum of understanding signed in July 2010 between Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS), Data Seal of Approval (DSA) Board and German Institute for Standardization (DIN) "Trustworthy Archives – Certification" Working Group.

The framework is intended to help organizations in obtaining appropriate certification as a trusted digital repository and establishes three increasingly demanding levels of assessment:

nestor catalogue of criteria

A German initiative, nestor (the Network of Expertise in Long-Term Storage of Digital Resources) sponsored by the German Ministry of Education and Research, developed a catalogue of criteria for trusted digital repositories in 2004. In 2008 the second version of the document was published. The catalogue, aiming primarily at German cultural heritage and higher education institutions, establishes guidelines for planning, implementing, and self-evaluation of trustworthy long-term digital repositories.^[77]

The nestor catalogue of criteria conforms to the OAIS reference model terminology and consists of three sections covering topics related to Organizational Framework, Object Management, and Infrastructure and Security.^[78]

PLANETS Project

In 2002 the Preservation and Long-term Access through Networked Services (PLANETS) project, part of the EU Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development 6, addressed core digital preservation challenges. The primary goal for Planets was to build practical services and tools to help ensure long-term access to digital cultural and scientific assets. The Open Planets project ended May 31, 2010.^[79] The outputs of the project are now sustained by the follow-on organisation, the Open Planets Foundation.^[80]^[81] On October 7, 2014 the Open Planets Foundation announced that it would be renamed the Open Preservation Foundation to align with the organization's current direction.^[82]

PLATTER

Planning Tool for Trusted Electronic Repositories (PLATTER) is a tool released by DigitalPreservationEurope (DPE) to help digital repositories in identifying their self-defined goals and priorities in order to gain trust from the stakeholders.^[83]

PLATTER is intended to be used as a complementary tool to DRAMBORA, NESTOR, and TRAC. It is based on ten core principles for trusted repositories and defines nine Strategic Objective Plans, covering such areas as acquisition, preservation and dissemination of content, finance, staffing, succession planning, technical infrastructure, data and metadata specifications, and disaster planning. The tool enables repositories to develop and maintain documentation required for an audit.^[84]

ISO 16363

A system for the "audit and certification of trustworthy digital repositories" was developed by the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) and published as ISO standard 16363 on 15 February 2012.^[85] Extending the OAIS reference model, and based largely on the TRAC checklist, the standard was designed for all types of digital repositories. It provides a detailed specification of criteria against which the trustworthiness of a digital repository can be evaluated.^[86]

The CCSDS Repository Audit and Certification Working Group also developed and submitted a second standard, defining operational requirements for organizations intending to provide repository auditing and certification as specified in ISO 16363.^[87] This standard was published as ISO 16919 – "requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of candidate trustworthy digital repositories" – on 1 November 2014.^[88]

Best practices

Although preservation strategies vary for different types of materials and between institutions, adhering to nationally and internationally recognized standards and practices is a crucial part of digital preservation activities. Best or recommended practices define strategies and procedures that may help organizations to implement existing standards or provide guidance in areas where no formal standards have been developed.^[89]

Best practices in digital preservation continue to evolve and may encompass processes that are performed on content prior to or at the point of ingest into a digital repository as well as processes performed on preserved files post-ingest over time. Best practices may also apply to the process of digitizing analog material and may include the creation of specialized metadata (such as technical, administrative and rights metadata) in addition to standard descriptive metadata. The preservation of born-digital content may include format transformations to facilitate long-term preservation or to provide better access.^[90]

No one institution can afford to develop all of the software tools needed to ensure the accessibility of digital materials over the long term. Thus the problem arises of maintaining a repository of shared tools. The Library of Congress has been doing that for years,^[91] until that role was assumed by the Community Owned Digital Preservation Tool Registry.^[92]

Audio preservation

Various best practices and guidelines for digital audio preservation have been developed, including:

The Audio Engineering Society (AES) also issues a variety of standards and guidelines relating to the creation of archival audio content and technical metadata.^[98]

Moving image preservation

The term "moving images" includes analog film and video and their born-digital forms: digital video, digital motion picture materials, and digital cinema. As analog videotape and film become obsolete, digitization has become a key preservation strategy, although many archives do continue to perform photochemical preservation of film stock.^[99]^[100]

"Digital preservation" has a double meaning for audiovisual collections: analog originals are preserved through digital reformatting, with the resulting digital files preserved; and born-digital content is collected, most often in proprietary formats that pose problems for future digital preservation.

There is currently no broadly accepted standard target digital preservation format for analog moving images.^[101]

The following resources offer information on analog to digital reformatting and preserving born-digital audiovisual content.

Email preservation

Approaches to preserving email may vary according to the purpose for which it is being preserved. For businesses and government entities, email preservation may be driven by the need to meet retention and supervision requirements for regulatory compliance and to allow for legal discovery. (Additional information about email archiving approaches for business and institutional purposes may be found under the separate article, Email archiving.) For research libraries and archives, the preservation of email that is part of born-digital or hybrid archival collections has as its goal ensuring its long-term availability as part of the historical and cultural record.^[107]

Several projects developing tools and methodologies for email preservation have been conducted based on various preservation strategies: normalizing email into XML format, migrating email to a new version of the software and emulating email environments: Memories Using Email (MUSE), Collaborative Electronic Records Project (CERP), [https://web.archive.org/web/20130604154259/http://www.records.ncdcr.gov/EmailPreservation/default.htm E-Mail Collection And Preservation] (EMCAP), PeDALS Email Extractor Software (PeDALS), XML Electronic Normalizing of Archives tool (XENA).

Some best practices and guidelines for email preservation can be found in the following resources:

Video game preservation

In 2007 the Keeping Emulation Environments Portable (KEEP) project, part of the EU Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development 7, developed tools and methodologies to keep digital software objects available in their original context. Digital software objects as video games might get lost because of digital obsolescence and non-availability of required legacy hardware or operating system software; such software is referred to as abandonware. Because the source code is often not available any longer,^[110] emulation is the only preservation opportunity. KEEP provided an emulation framework to help the creation of such emulators. KEEP was developed by Vincent Joguin, first launched in February 2009 and was coordinated by Elisabeth Freyre of the French National Library.^[111]

A community project, MAME, aims to emulate any historic computer game, including arcade games, console games and the like, at a hardware level, for future archiving.

In January 2012 the POCOS project funded by JISC organised a workshop on the preservation of gaming environments and virtual worlds.^[112]

Personal archiving

There are many things consumers and artists can do themselves to help care for their collections at home.

The Library of Congress also hosts a list for the self-preserver which includes direction toward programs and guidelines from other institutions that will help the user preserve social media, email, and formatting general guidelines (such as caring for CDs).^[114]

Education

The Digital Preservation Outreach and Education (DPOE), as part of the Library of Congress, serves to foster preservation of digital content through a collaborative network of instructors and collection management professionals working in cultural heritage institutions. Composed of Library of Congress staff, the National Trainer Network, the DPOE Steering Committee, and a community of Digital Preservation Education Advocates, as of 2013 the DPOE has 24 working trainers across the six regions of the United States.^[116] In 2010 the DPOE conducted an assessment, reaching out to archivists, librarians, and other information professionals around the country. A working group of DPOE instructors then developed a curriculum ^[117] based on the assessment results and other similar digital preservation curricula designed by other training programs, such as LYRASIS, Educopia Institute, MetaArchive Cooperative, University of North Carolina, DigCCurr (Digital Curation Curriculum) and Cornell University-ICPSR Digital Preservation Management Workshops. The resulting core principles are also modeled on the principles outlined in "A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections" by the National Information Standards Organization (NISO).^[118]

In Europe, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and King's College London offer a joint program in [https://www.ibi.hu-berlin.de/de/studium/dc Digital Curation] that emphasizes both digital humanities and the technologies necessary for long term curation. The MSc in Information Management and Preservation (Digital) offered by the HATII at the University of Glasgow has been running since 2005 and is the pioneering program in the field.

Examples of initiatives

A number of open source products have been developed to assist with digital preservation, including Archivematica, DSpace, Fedora Commons, OPUS, SobekCM and EPrints. The commercial sector also offers digital preservation software tools, such as Ex Libris Ltd.'s Rosetta, Preservica's Cloud, Standard and Enterprise Editions, CONTENTdm, Digital Commons, Equella, intraLibrary, Open Repository and Vital.^[119]

Large-scale initiatives

Many research libraries and archives have begun or are about to begin large-scale digital preservation initiatives (LSDIs). The main players in LSDIs are cultural institutions, commercial companies such as Google and Microsoft, and non-profit groups including the Open Content Alliance (OCA), the Million Book Project (MBP), and HathiTrust. The primary motivation of these groups is to expand access to scholarly resources.

Approximately 30 cultural entities, including the 12-member Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC), have signed digitization agreements with either Google or Microsoft. Several of these cultural entities are participating in the Open Content Alliance and the Million Book Project. Some libraries are involved in only one initiative and others have diversified their digitization strategies through participation in multiple initiatives. The three main reasons for library participation in LSDIs are: access, preservation, and research and development. It is hoped that digital preservation will ensure that library materials remain accessible for future generations. Libraries have a perpetual responsibility for their materials and a commitment to archive their digital materials. Libraries plan to use digitized copies as backups for works in case they go out of print, deteriorate, or are lost and damaged.

See also

Footnotes

1. ^{{cite web |last=Digital Preservation Coalition |title=Introduction: Definitions and Concepts |url=http://www.dpconline.org/advice/preservationhandbook/introduction/definitions-and-concepts |work=Digital Preservation Handbook |year=2008 |publisher=York, UK |accessdate=24 February 2012 |quote=Digital preservation refers to the series of managed activities necessary to ensure continued access to digital information for as long as necessary. |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120401184900/http://www.dpconline.org/advice/preservationhandbook/introduction/definitions-and-concepts |archivedate=1 April 2012 |df= }}
2. ^¹²³⁴⁵⁶Day, Michael. "The long-term preservation of Web content". Web archiving (Berlin: Springer, 2006), pp. 177-199. {{ISBN|3-540-23338-5}}.
3. ^¹Evans, Mark; Carter, Laura. (December 2008). The Challenges of Digital Preservation. Presentation at the Library of Parliament, Ottawa.
4. ^{{Cite news|url=http://www.ala.org/alcts/resources/preserv/defdigpres0408|title=Definitions of Digital Preservation|last=American Library Association|first=|date=2008-02-21|work=Association for Library Collections & Technical Services (ALCTS)|access-date=2018-03-09|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|language=en}}
5. ^{{cite book|last1=Prytherch|first1=compiled by Ray|title=Harrod's librarians' glossary and reference book|date=2005|publisher=Ashgate|location=Aldershot [u.a.]|isbn=978-0-7546-4038-7|edition=10.}}{{page needed||date=September 2016}}
6. ^{{cite web|title=Society of American Archivists Glossary - selection |work=web site |year=2014 |url=http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/s/selection |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141012221022/http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/s/selection |archivedate=12 October 2014 }}
7. ^{{cite web|title=Society of American Archivists Glossary - appraisal |work=web site |year=2014 |url=http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/a/appraisal |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141012221148/http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/a/appraisal |archivedate=12 October 2014 }}
8. ^{{cite web|title=InterPARES 2 Chain of Preservation Model |work=web site |year=2007 |url=http://www.interpares.org/ip2/ip2_model_display.cfm?model=cop |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924035605/http://www.interpares.org/ip2/ip2_model_display.cfm?model=cop |archivedate=24 September 2015 }}
9. ^{{cite web|title=InterPARES 2 Project |work=web site |url=http://www.interpares.org/ip2/ip2_products.cfm |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141002192640/http://www.interpares.org/ip2/ip2_products.cfm |archivedate=2 October 2014 }}
10. ^{{cite web|title=Society of American Archivists Glossary - macro-appraisal |work=web site |year=2014 |url=http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/m/macro-appraisal |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141012221236/http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/m/macro-appraisal |archivedate=12 October 2014 }}
11. ^{{cite journal |authorlink=Courtney C. Mumma, Glenn Dingwall, Sue Bigelow |title=A First Look at the Acquisition and Appraisal of the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Fonds: or, SELECT * FROM VANOC_Records AS Archives WHERE Value="true"; |journal=Archivaria |volume=72 |issue=72 |pages=114–117 |date=2011 |url=http://journals.sfu.ca/archivar/index.php/archivaria/article/view/13361/14666 |issn=1923-6409 |accessdate=October 8, 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141013135211/http://journals.sfu.ca/archivar/index.php/archivaria/article/view/13361/14666 |archivedate=October 13, 2014 |last1=Bigelow |first1=Sue |last2=Dingwall |first2=Glenn |last3=Mumma |first3=Courtney C. }}
12. ^{{cite web|title=Paradigm (Personal Archives Accessible in Digital Media): Appraising digital records: a worthwhile exercise? |work=web site |year=2008 |url=http://www.paradigm.ac.uk/workbook/appraisal/digital-appraisal.html |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150201072749/http://www.paradigm.ac.uk/workbook/appraisal/digital-appraisal.html |archivedate=1 February 2015 }}
13. ^{{cite web|title=Library of Congress Recommended Format Specifications |work=web site |year=2014 |url=https://www.loc.gov/preservation/resources/rfs/ |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141014175635/http://www.loc.gov/preservation/resources/rfs/ |archivedate=14 October 2014 }}
14. ^¹Greenberg, Jane. "Understanding Metadata and Metadata Schemes {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141107022958/http://www.niso.org/publications/press/UnderstandingMetadata.pdf |date=2014-11-07 }}." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 40.3-4 (2005): 17-36. National Information Standards Organization.
15. ^"Managing" {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141013234403/http://www.jiscdigitalmedia.ac.uk/managing |date=2014-10-13 }}. Jisc Digital Media. 08 Oct. 2014.
16. ^"Integrity". Glossary. Consortium of European Social Science Data Archives (CESSDA). cessda.net. Retrieved 2016-11-02.
17. ^{{cite web|url=https://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations/rebecca-SKOS/preservationEvents-FixityCheck.html |title=Preservation Events Concept: fixity check |work=loc.gov |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141014155135/http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations/rebecca-SKOS/preservationEvents-FixityCheck.html |archivedate=2014-10-14 }}
18. ^Testing Software Tools of Potential Interest for Digital Preservation Activities at the National Library of Australia {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130114111844/http://www.openplanetsfoundation.org/system/files/Digital%20Preservation%20Project%20Report%20-%20Testing%20Software%20Tools.pdf |date=2013-01-14 }}
19. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.library.illinois.edu/dcc/bestpractices/chapter_10_technicalmetadata.html |title=10.0 Best Practices for Technical Metadata |work=illinois.edu |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141009081725/http://www.library.illinois.edu/dcc/bestpractices/chapter_10_technicalmetadata.html |archivedate=2014-10-09 }}
20. ^{{Cite journal|title = Are current archiving systems reliable enough?|journal = International Urogynecology Journal|volume = 26|issue = 10|date = 2015-07-30|issn = 0937-3462|page=1553 |doi = 10.1007/s00192-015-2805-7|pmid = 26224384|first = Parham|last = Habibzadeh}}
21. ^Sustainability of Digital Resources. (2008). TASI: Technical Advisory Service for Images. {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080304023605/http://www.tasi.ac.uk/advice/managing/sust.html |date=March 4, 2008 }}
22. ^Towards a Theory of Digital Preservation. (2008). International Journal of Digital Curation {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130123060816/http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/63 |date=2013-01-23 }}
23. ^Electronic Archives Preservation Policy {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130310105710/http://wiki.lib.sun.ac.za/index.php/SUNScholar/Digital_Preservation/Electronic_Archives_Preservation_Policy |date=March 10, 2013 }}
24. ^{{cite book|author1=Jeffrey Schnapp|author2=Matthew Battles|title=Library Beyond the Book |year= 2014|publisher=Harvard University Press|isbn=978-0-674-72503-4 |pages=66–68|title-link=Library Beyond the Book}}
25. ^{{cite web|url=http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/pamphlet/2011/04/18/the-scouring-of-the-white-horse/ |author=Stuart Shieber |title=Scouring of the White Horse |work=Occasional Pamphlet (blog) |publisher=Harvard University |date=April 2011 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141007063906/http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/pamphlet/2011/04/18/the-scouring-of-the-white-horse/ |archivedate=2014-10-07 }}
26. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september12/vermaaten/09vermaaten.html |title=Identifying Threats to Successful Digital Preservation: the SPOT Model for Risk Assessment |work=dlib.org |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150110194245/http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september12/vermaaten/09vermaaten.html |archivedate=2015-01-10 }}
27. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/76/44 |title=Defining File Format Obsolescence: A Risky Journey - Pearson - International Journal of Digital Curation |work=ijdc.net |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141014030726/http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/76/44 |archivedate=2014-10-14 }}
28. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/sustain/sustain.shtml |title=Sustainability Factors |work=digitalpreservation.gov |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141013230220/http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/sustain/sustain.shtml |archivedate=2014-10-13 }}
29. ^"The Significant Properties of Digital Objects : Jisc." {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141014154001/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/preservation/2008sigprops.aspx |date=2014-10-14 }} The Significant Properties of Digital Objects : JISC, 08 Oct. 2014
30. ^Hedstrom, Margaret, and Christopher A. Lee. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20070703013435/http://www.ils.unc.edu/callee/sigprops_dlm2002.pdf Significant Properties of Digital Objects: Definitions, Applications, Implications]". Proceedings of the DLM-Forum 2002 Parallel Session 3 (2002): 218-33. University of North Carolina: School of Information and Library Science.
31. ^{{cite web|title=InterPARES 2 Terminology Database - authenticity |work=web site |year=2007 |url=http://www.interpares.org/ip2/ip2_terminology_db.cfm |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141007022207/http://www.interpares.org/ip2/ip2_terminology_db.cfm |archivedate=7 October 2014 }}
32. ^{{cite web|title=Society of American Archivists Glossary - accuracy |work=web site |year=2014 |url=http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/a/accuracy |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141012221951/http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/a/accuracy |archivedate=12 October 2014 }}
33. ^¹{{cite book|last=Tibbo|first=Helen R.|title=On the Nature and Importance of Archiving in the Digital Age|year=2003|volume=57|page=26|doi=10.1016/S0065-2458(03)57001-2|series=Advances in Computers|isbn=9780120121571}}
34. ^{{cite book|author=Donald Waters |author2=John Garrett |title=Preserving digital information: Report of the task force on archiving of digital information |isbn=978-1-88733450-1 |year=1996 |publisher=CLIR |url=http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub63 |accessdate=November 15, 2012 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150909083506/http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub63 |archivedate=September 9, 2015 }}
35. ^{{cite web|title=Principles and Good Practice for Preserving Data. IHSN Working Paper No 003 |website= |publisher=International Household Survey Network |date=December 2009 |url=http://www.surveynetwork.org/home/sites/default/files/resources/IHSN-WP003.pdf |doi= |accessdate=March 20, 2015 |archiveurl=https://www.webcitation.org/6XAJlDXpu?url=http://www.surveynetwork.org/home/sites/default/files/resources/IHSN-WP003.pdf |archivedate=March 20, 2015 |deadurl=yes |df= }}
36. ^{{cite book|last=Harvey|first=Ross|title=Preserving Digital Materials|year=2012|publisher=Berlin, K. G. Saur|isbn=9783110253689|pages=97, 156}}
37. ^{{cite journal|last=Conway|first=Paul|title=Preservation in the Age of Google: Digitization, Digital Preservation, and Dilemmas|journal=The Library Quarterly|year=2010|volume=80|issue=1|pages=66–67|jstor=648463|doi=10.1086/648463}}
38. ^{{cite book|last=Harvey|first=Ross|title=Digital Curation|year=2010|publisher=Neal-Schuman Publishers|location=NY|isbn=9781555706944|page=39}}
39. ^¹Cornell University Library. (2005) Digital Preservation Management: Implementing Short-term Strategies for Long-term Problems {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120917090708/http://www.dpworkshop.org/dpm-eng/eng_index.html |date=2012-09-17 }}
40. ^Research Libraries Group. (2002). Trusted Digital Repositories: Attributes and Responsibilities {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080220153831/http://www.oclc.org/programs/ourwork/past/trustedrep/repositories.pdf/ |date=2008-02-20 }}
41. ^{{cite journal | author = Gladney, H. M. | year = 2004 | title = Trustworthy 100-year digital objects: Evidence after every witness is dead | journal = ACM Transactions on Information Systems | pages = 406–436 | volume = 22 | issue = 3 | doi = 10.1145/1010614.1010617}}
42. ^{{cite book|last=Suderman|first=Jim|title=Principle-based concepts for the long-term preservation of digital records|journal=Proceedings of the 1st International Digital Preservation Interoperability Framework Symposium|year=2010|page=1|doi=10.1145/2039263.2039270|isbn=9781450301107}}
43. ^{{cite journal|last=Duranti |first=Luciana |title=The Long-Term Preservation of Authentic Electronic Record |journal=Proceedings of the 27th VLDB Conference, Roma, Italy |year=2001 |url=http://www.vldb.org/conf/2001/P625.pdf |accessdate=September 21, 2012 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130210012918/http://www.vldb.org/conf/2001/P625.pdf |archivedate=February 10, 2013 }}
44. ^{{cite journal|last=Hackett|first=Yvette|title=InterPARES: The Search for Authenticity in Electronic Records|journal=The Moving Image|year=2003|volume=3|issue=2|page=106}}
45. ^{{cite journal|last=Laszlo |first=Krisztina |author2=McMillan, Timothy |author3=Yuhasz, Jennifer |title=The InterPARES 3 Project: Implementing Digital Records Preservation in a Contemporary Art Gallery and Ethnographic Museum |journal=Annual Conference of the International Documentation Committee of the International Council of Museums (CIDOC), 15–18 September 2008, Athens, Greece |year=2008 |page=4 |url=http://www.interpares.org/display_file.cfm?doc=ip3_canada_dissemination_cp_laszlo_et-al_cidoc_2008.pdf |accessdate=September 21, 2012 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130610004326/http://www.interpares.org/display_file.cfm?doc=ip3_canada_dissemination_cp_laszlo_et-al_cidoc_2008.pdf |archivedate=10 June 2013 }}
46. ^{{Citation |last=Ross |first=Seamus |title=Changing Trains at Wigan: Digital Preservation and the Future of Scholarship |publisher=British Library (National Preservation Office) |place=London |edition=1 |year=2000 |url=http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/stratpolprog/collectioncare/publications/reports/wigan_digital_preservation.pdf |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160602020013/http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/stratpolprog/collectioncare/publications/reports/wigan_digital_preservation.pdf |archivedate=2016-06-02 }}
47. ^{{Cite journal|title = Decay of References to Web sites in Articles Published in General Medical Journals: Mainstream vs Small Journals|journal = Applied Clinical Informatics|date = 2013-01-01|volume = 4|issue = 4|pages = 455–464|doi = 10.4338/aci-2013-07-ra-0055|pmid = 24454575|first = P.|last = Habibzadeh|first2 = Schattauer GmbH - Publishers for Medicine and Natural|last2 = Sciences|pmc = 3885908}}
48. ^{{cite journal|last=Becker,C.|title=Systematic planning for digital preservation|journal=International Journal on Digital Libraries |year=2009 |issue=10|pages=133–157|doi=10.1007/s00799-009-0057-1 |first1=Christoph|last2=Kulovits|first2=Hannes|last3=Guttenbrunner |first3=Mark|last4=Strodl|first4=Stephan |last5=Rauber|first5=Andreas |last6=Hofman|first6=Hans|volume=10|display-authors=etal|citeseerx=10.1.1.156.8390}}
49. ^{{Cite journal|url=http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:25658314|title=Truman, Gail. 2016. Web Archiving Environmental Scan. Harvard Library Report|last=|first=|website=|access-date=|year=2016|publisher=Gail Truman}}
50. ^{{cite conference |author=Arora, Jagdish |title=Digital Preservation, an Overview. |booktitle= Proceedings of the National Seminar on Open Access to Textual and Multimedia Content: Bridging the Digital Divide, January 29–30, 2009 |year=2009 |page=111}}
51. ^{{Cite web|url=https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ko7JwgNFf5KCnyQJ3sSY2d1T2wfSoRLIQYn-AjNiO-E/edit|title=Preservation Storage Criteria, Version 2|last=|first=|date=|website=|access-date=}}
52. ^{{cite web |url=https://archive.org/details/clasp |title=The Internet Archive Classic Software Preservation Project | publisher=Internet Archive |accessdate=October 21, 2007| archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20071019034848/https://archive.org/details/clasp| archivedate= 19 October 2007 | deadurl= no}}
53. ^{{cite web| url=https://archive.org/about/dmca.php| title=Internet Archive Gets DMCA Exemption To Help Archive Vintage Software| accessdate=October 21, 2007| archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20071020011825/https://archive.org/about/dmca.php| archivedate=20 October 2007| deadurl= no}}
54. ^{{cite journal |url=http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2009/74fr55138.pdf |date=28 October 2009 |title=Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies |author=Library of Congress Copyright Office |journal=Federal Register |volume=27 |issue=206 |pages=55137–55139 |accessdate=December 17, 2009| archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20091202003904/http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2009/74fr55138.pdf| archivedate= 2 December 2009| deadurl= no}}
55. ^{{cite journal |url=http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2006/71fr68472.html |title=Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies |journal=Federal Register |volume=71 |issue=227 |pages=68472–68480 |date=2006-11-27 |author=Library of Congress Copyright Office |accessdate=2007-10-21 |quote=Computer programs and video games distributed in formats that have become obsolete and that require the original media or hardware as a condition of access, when circumvention is accomplished for the purpose of preservation or archival reproduction of published digital works by a library or archive. A format shall be considered obsolete if the machine or system necessary to render perceptible a work stored in that format is no longer manufactured or is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace.| archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071101055030/http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2006/71fr68472.html| archivedate=2007-11-01| deadurl= no}}
56. ^[https://www.loc.gov:8081/today/pr/2013/files/twitter_report_2013jan.pdf Update on the Twitter Archive At the Library of Congress]
57. ^{{cite web|url=http://articles.forensicfocus.com/2012/04/25/key-twitter-and-facebook-metadata-fields-forensic-investigators-need-to-be-aware-of/ |title=Key Twitter and Facebook Metadata Fields Forensic Investigators Need to be Aware of |work=Forensic Focus - Articles |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130317092729/http://articles.forensicfocus.com/2012/04/25/key-twitter-and-facebook-metadata-fields-forensic-investigators-need-to-be-aware-of/ |archivedate=2013-03-17 |date=2012-04-25 }}
58. ^{{cite web|last=Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access |title=Sustainable Economics for a Digital Planet: Ensuring Long-Term Access to Digital Information, final report |url=http://brtf.sdsc.edu/biblio/BRTF_Final_Report.pdf |publisher=La Jolla, Calif. |year=2010 |page=35 |accessdate=July 5, 2012 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20121118235142/http://brtf.sdsc.edu/biblio/BRTF_Final_Report.pdf |archivedate=November 18, 2012 }}
59. ^Online Computer Library Center, Inc. (2006). OCLC Digital Archive Preservation Policy and Supporting Documentation {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140911044907/http://www.mesk7.com/archivage-numerique-fiable.php |date=2014-09-11 }}, p. 5
60. ^Scott, J. (2013, Sept. 23), "Long-term Digital Storage: Simple Steps to Get Started {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140808114509/http://www.historyassociates.com/blog/archives/long-term-digital-storage-simple-steps-to-get-started/ |date=2014-08-08 }}", History Associates, retrieved 17 June 2014.
61. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/50/35 |title=Emulation for Digital Preservation in Practice: The Results - van der Hoeven - International Journal of Digital Curation |work=ijdc.net |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130131065829/http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/50/35 |archivedate=2013-01-31 }}
62. ^{{cite book|first=Jeff |last=Rothenberg |year=1998 |isbn=978-1-887334-63-1 |title=Avoiding Technological Quicksand: Finding a Viable Technical Foundation for Digital Preservation |url=http://www.clir.org/PUBS/reports/rothenberg/contents.html |publisher=Council on Library and Information Resources |location=Washington, DC, USA |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080220021049/http://www.clir.org/PUBS/reports/rothenberg/contents.html |archivedate=2008-02-20 }}
63. ^{{cite conference | author = Lorie, Raymond A.| year = 2001 | title = Long Term Preservation of Digital Information | booktitle = Proceedings of the 1st ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL '01) | location = Roanoke, Virginia, USA | pages = 346–352}}
64. ^{{cite magazine|author=Hoeven, J. |year=2007 |title=Dioscuri: emulator for digital preservation |magazine=D-Lib Magazine |volume=13 |issue=11/12 |url=http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november07/11inbrief.html |doi=10.1045/november2007-inbrief |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071213220355/http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november07/11inbrief.html |archivedate=2007-12-13 }}
65. ^Salman Rushdie's Digital Life{{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120324115032/http://marbl.library.emory.edu/innovations/salman-rushdie |date=March 24, 2012 }}
66. ^Digital Preservation: Planning, Process and Approaches for Libraries Teena KapoorJaypee Institute of Information TechnologyA-10, Sector-62, Noida UP
67. ^¹SOLUTIONS WALKTHROUGH REPORT {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160216122829/http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/dp/dpe/dpe_challenge/reports/ferreira_report.pdf |date=2016-02-16 }}, José Miguel Araújo Ferreira Department of Information Systems University of Minho 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
68. ^Moore, Reagan W., Andre Merzky. Persistent Archive Research Group. Dec. 25, 2003.
69. ^NISO Framework Advisory Group. (2007). A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections, 3rd edition {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080517134921/http://www.niso.org/publications/rp/framework3.pdf |date=2008-05-17 }}, p. 57,
70. ^National Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage. (2002). NINCH Guide to Good Practice in the Digital Representation and Management of Cultural Heritage Materials {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071208133343/http://www.nyu.edu/its/humanities/ninchguide/ |date=2007-12-08 }}
71. ^{{cite web|title=Center for Research Libraries – Other Assessment Tools |url=http://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics-assessing-and-certifying/other-assessment-tools |accessdate=Sep 6, 2012 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130107184617/http://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics-assessing-and-certifying/other-assessment-tools |archivedate=2013-01-07 }}
72. ^{{cite web|last=OCLC and CRL |title=Trustworthy Repository Audit & Certification: Criteria & Checklist |url=http://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/pages/trac_0.pdf |year=2007 |accessdate=April 16, 2012 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120219174424/http://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/pages/trac_0.pdf |archivedate=February 19, 2012 }}
73. ^{{cite web|last=Phillips |first=Stephen C |title=Service level agreements for storage and preservation, p.13. |url=http://www.prestocentre.org/library/resources/service-level-agreements-storage-and-preservation |year=2010 |accessdate=May 1, 2012 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120604034148/http://www.prestocentre.org/library/resources/service-level-agreements-storage-and-preservation |archivedate=June 4, 2012 }}
74. ^{{Citation |last1=McHugh |first1=Andrew |last2=Ross |first2=Seamus |last3=Ruusaleep |first3=Raivo |last4=Hofman |first4=Hans |lastauthoramp=yes |title=The Digital Repository Audit Method Based on Risk Assessment (DRAMBORA) |publisher=DigitalPreservationEurope and Digital Curation Centre |place=Edinburgh and Glasgow |edition=1 |year=2007 |url=http://www.repositoryaudit.eu/download/ |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160407103026/http://www.repositoryaudit.eu/download/ |archivedate=2016-04-07 }}
75. ^{{cite journal | last1 = McHugh| first1 = Andrew| last2 = Ross| first2 = Seamus| last3 = Innocenti| first3 = Perla| last4 = Ruusalepp| first4 = Raivo| last5 = Hofman| first5 = Hans| lastauthoramp = yes| title = Bringing Self Assessment Home: Repository Profiling and Key Lines of Enquiry Within DRAMBORA| journal = International Journal of Digital Curation| volume = 3| issue = 2| pages = 130–142| year = 2008| doi =10.2218/ijdc.v3i2.64}}
76. ^{{cite journal |last=APARSEN Project |title=Report on Peer Review of Digital Repositories |year=2012 |page=10 |url=http://www.alliancepermanentaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/04/APARSEN-REP-D33_1B-01-1_1.pdf |accessdate=October 8, 2012 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130515215320/http://www.alliancepermanentaccess.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/04/APARSEN-REP-D33_1B-01-1_1.pdf |archivedate=May 15, 2013 |df= }}
77. ^{{cite book|last=Dobratz|first=Susanne|title=Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries |year=2007 |publisher=Springer Berlin / Heidelberg|isbn=978-3-540-74850-2|pages=210–222|author2=Schoger, Astrid|chapter=Trustworthy Digital Long-Term Repositories: The Nestor Approach in the Context of International Developments}}
78. ^{{cite web|last=Horstkemper |first=Gregor |title=Assessment of Trustworthiness of Digital Archives |url=http://www.peerproject.eu/fileadmin/media/ppt_about_peer/Proceedings.pdf#page=84 |work=Proceedings of the Sino-German Symposium on Development of Library and Information Services |accessdate=October 2, 2012 |author2=Beinert, Tobias |author3=Schrimpf, Sabine |pages=74–75 |year=2009 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160110025156/http://www.peerproject.eu/fileadmin/media/ppt_about_peer/Proceedings.pdf |archivedate=January 10, 2016 }}
79. ^{{cite web|title=Planets project |work=web site |year=2014 |url=http://www.planets-project.eu/ |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140922071849/http://planets-project.eu/ |archivedate=22 September 2014 }}
80. ^{{cite web|title=Planets project |work=web site |year=2009 |url=http://www.planets-project.eu/ |accessdate=7 December 2011 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20111203104918/http://www.planets-project.eu/ |archivedate=3 December 2011 }}
81. ^{{cite web|title=The Open Planets Foundation |work=web site |year=2010 |url=http://www.openplanetsfoundation.org/ |accessdate=7 December 2011 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20111127123442/http://www.openplanetsfoundation.org/ |archivedate=27 November 2011 }}
82. ^{{cite web|title=Open Planets Foundation, Becky McGuinness's blog |work=web site |year=2014 |url=http://www.openplanetsfoundation.org/blogs/2014-10-07-open-planets-foundation-becoming-open-preservation-foundation |accessdate=8 October 2014 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141012001047/http://openplanetsfoundation.org/blogs/2014-10-07-open-planets-foundation-becoming-open-preservation-foundation |archivedate=12 October 2014 }}
83. ^{{cite web|last=DigitalPreservationEurope |title=DPE Repository Planning Checklist and Guidance DPED3.2 |url=http://www.digitalpreservationeurope.eu/platter.pdf |year=2008 |accessdate=2012-06-24 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20111014181729/http://digitalpreservationeurope.eu/platter.pdf |archivedate=2011-10-14 }}
84. ^{{cite web|last=Ball|first=Alex|title=Preservation and Curation in Institutional Repositories (version 1.3) |page=49 |url=http://www.dcc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/reports/irpc-report-v1.3.pdf|publisher=Edinburgh, UK: Digital Curation Centre| year=2010 |accessdate=June 24, 2012}}
85. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=56510 |title=ISO 16363:2012 |website=ISO |access-date=2016-10-19 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20161019215728/http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=56510 |archivedate=2016-10-19 }}
86. ^{{cite web |title=Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories |date=September 2011 |url=http://public.ccsds.org/publications/archive/652x0m1.pdf |location=Washington, DC |publisher=CCSDS |access-date=10 October 2012 }}
87. ^{{cite book|title=Aligning National Approaches to Digital Preservation|year=2012|publisher=Atlanta, GA: Educopia Institute |isbn=978-0-9826653-1-2 |pages=115–165 [124]|authors=Ruusalepp, Raivo; Lee, Christopher A.; van der Werf, Bram; Woolard, Matthew |editor=McGovern, Nancy Y|chapter=Standards Alignment}}
88. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=57950 |title=ISO 16919:2014 |website=ISO |access-date=2016-10-19 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20161019220634/http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=57950 |archivedate=2016-10-19 }}
89. ^¹{{cite web|last=Casey |first=M. |title=Sound Directions: Best Practices for Audio Preservation |url=http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/projects/sounddirections/papersPresent/sd_bp_07.pdf |publisher=Bloomington: Indiana University and Cambridge: Harvard University |accessdate=30 October 2012 |author2=Gordon, B. |year=2007 |page=5 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120515201224/http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/projects/sounddirections/papersPresent/sd_bp_07.pdf |archivedate=15 May 2012 }}
90. ^{{cite web|last=Verheul |first=I. |title=Networking for Digital Preservation: Current Practice in 15 National Libraries |url=http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/hq/publications/ifla-publications-series-119.pdf |publisher=K.G. Saur, Munich |accessdate=30 October 2012 |year=2006 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140407104311/http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/hq/publications/ifla-publications-series-119.pdf |archivedate=7 April 2014 }}
91. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/tools/ |title=Tools Showcase - Digital Preservation (Library of Congress) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120110150657/http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/tools/ |archive-date=January 10, 2012 |dead-url=no }}
92. ^{{cite web |url=http://coptr.digipres.org/Main_Page |title=Community Owned digital Preservation Tool Registry (COPTR) |year=2013}}
93. ^{{cite web|last=International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives |title=Guidelines on the Production and Preservation of Digital Audio Objects |url=http://www.iasa-web.org/tc04/audio-preservation |accessdate=1 May 2015 |year=2009 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150508171039/http://www.iasa-web.org/tc04/audio-preservation |archivedate=8 May 2015 }}
94. ^{{cite web|author1=Council on Library |author2=Information Resources |title=Publication 137: Capturing Analog Sound for Digital Preservation: Report of a Roundtable Discussion of Best Practices for Transferring Analog Discs and Tapes |url=http://www.clir.org/pubs/abstract/reports/pub137 |accessdate=6 September 2012 |year=2006 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120722051129/http://www.clir.org/pubs/abstract/reports/pub137 |archivedate=22 July 2012 }}
95. ^{{cite journal|last=Digital Audio Working Group. Collaborative Digitization Program |title=Digital Audio Best Practices (Version 2.1) |year=2006 |url=http://www.mndigital.org/digitizing/standards/audio.pdf |accessdate=30 October 2012 |publisher=Aurora, Colorado |page=4 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130228142216/http://www.mndigital.org/digitizing/standards/audio.pdf |archivedate=28 February 2013 }}
96. ^{{cite web|last=Columbia University Libraries |title=Preserving Historic Audio Content: Developing Infrastructures and Practices for Digital Conversion. Final Report to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation |url=https://library.columbia.edu/content/dam/librarywebsecure/behind_the_scenes/mellon_audio/columbia_preserving_audio_final_report_narrative.pdf |accessdate=30 October 2012 |page=5 |year=2010 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203183527/https://library.columbia.edu/content/dam/librarywebsecure/behind_the_scenes/mellon_audio/columbia_preserving_audio_final_report_narrative.pdf |archivedate=3 December 2013 }}
97. ^{{cite journal|last=Beers |first=Shane |author2=Parker, Bria |title=Hathi Trust and the Challenge of Digital Audio |journal=IASA Journal |year=2011 |issue=36 |url=http://www.hathitrust.org/documents/beers-parker-iasa-201101.pdf |accessdate=5 November 2012 |page=39 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120127074942/http://www.hathitrust.org/documents/beers-parker-iasa-201101.pdf |archivedate=27 January 2012 }}
98. ^{{cite web|last=Audio Engineering Society |title=Publications |url=http://www.aes.org/publications/standards/ |accessdate=5 November 2012 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20121028181559/http://www.aes.org/publications/standards/ |archivedate=28 October 2012 }}
99. ^{{cite book|title=The Digital Dilemma: Strategic Issues in Archiving and Accessing Digital Motion Picture Materials. |year=2007 |publisher=Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Science and Technology Council |page=19 |url=http://www.oscars.org/science-technology/council/projects/digitaldilemma/ |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130218075928/http://www.oscars.org/science-technology/council/projects/digitaldilemma/ |archivedate=2013-02-18 }}
100. ^{{cite book|title=Commission Staff Working Document on the challenges for European film heritage from the analogue and the digital era : Third implementation report of the 2005 EP and Council Recommendation on Film Heritage |year=2012 |location=Brussels |pages=11, 17, 93–114 |url=http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/docs/reg/cinema/report_3/swd_2012_431_en.pdf |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131007171056/http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/docs/reg/cinema/report_3/swd_2012_431_en.pdf |archivedate=October 7, 2013 }}
101. ^¹{{cite book|title=The Digital Dilemma 2: Perspectives from Independent Filmmakers, Documentarians and Nonprofit Audiovisual Archives : Nonprofit Audiovisual Archives section|year=2012|publisher=Science and Technology Council, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences|url=http://www.oscars.org/tdd2}}
102. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/content/video.shtml |title=Moving Images |work=digitalpreservation.gov |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130425032848/http://digitalpreservation.gov/formats/content/video.shtml |archivedate=2013-04-25 }}
103. ^{{cite web|last=Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative |title=Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative |url=http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov |accessdate=5 March 2013 |year=2013 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130204231349/http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/ |archivedate=4 February 2013 }}
104. ^{{cite web|url=https://www.prestocentre.org/library |title=PrestoCentre |work=prestocentre.org |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20121130064826/http://www.prestocentre.org/library |archivedate=2012-11-30 }}
105. ^{{cite journal |last=Tadic |first=Linda |title=Video Preservation for the Millennia |journal=AMIA Tech Review Journal |year=2012 |issue=4 |url=http://www.amiatechreview.org/V12-05/papers/tadic.pdf |accessdate=21 March 2013 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150510054430/http://www.amiatechreview.org/V12-05/papers/tadic.pdf |archivedate=10 May 2015 |df= }}
106. ^{{cite conference|author=Goethals, Andrea |author2=Wendy Gogel |title=Reshaping the Repository: The Challenge of Email Archiving. |booktitle=7th International Conference on Preservation of Digital Objects (iPRES2010) |year=2010 |url=http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/dp/ipres2010/papers/goethals-08.pdf |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130602224925/http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/dp/ipres2010/papers/goethals-08.pdf |archivedate=2013-06-02 }}
107. ^¹{{cite journal|last=Prom |first=Christopher J |title=Technology Watch Report 11-01: Preserving Email |year=2011 |page=5 |url=http://www.dpconline.org/component/docman/doc_download/739-dpctw11-01pdf |accessdate=18 February 2013 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130824021447/http://www.dpconline.org/component/docman/doc_download/739-dpctw11-01pdf |archivedate=24 August 2013 }}
108. ^{{cite journal|last=Pennock|first=Maureen|title=Curating E-Mails: A Life-cycle Approach to the Management and Preservation of E-mail Messages|journal=DCC Digital Curation Manual|year=2006|url=http://www.dcc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/resource/curation-manual/chapters/curating-e-mails/curating-e-mails.pdf|accessdate=18 February 2013}}
109. ^{{cite book|last=Maitland |first=Jo |title=Best Practices: Email Archiving |year=2008 |publisher=Forrester Research, Inc |url=http://www.usdatavault.com/library/email_archiving_best_practices.pdf |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100704225020/http://www.usdatavault.com/library/email_archiving_best_practices.pdf |archivedate=2010-07-04 }}
110. ^¹{{cite web|url=http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6271/where_games_go_to_sleep_the_game_.php?print=1 |title=Where Games Go To Sleep: The Game Preservation Crisis, Part 1 |first=John |last=Andersen |quote=The existence of decaying technology, disorganization, and poor storage could in theory put a video game to sleep permanently -- never to be played again. Troubling admissions have surfaced over the years concerning video game preservation. When questions concerning re-releases of certain game titles are brought up during interviews with developers, for example, these developers would reveal issues of game production material being lost or destroyed. Certain game titles could not see a re-release due to various issues. One story began to circulate of source code being lost altogether for a well-known RPG, preventing its re-release on a new console. |publisher=Gamasutra |accessdate=2013-01-10 |date=2011-01-27 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130422061043/http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6271/where_games_go_to_sleep_the_game_.php?print=1 |archivedate=2013-04-22 }}
111. ^{{cite web|url=http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=FP7_PROJ_EN&ACTION=D&DOC=14&CAT=PROJ&QUERY=011f6d8aa49a:9a36:4c327c02&RCN=89496 |title=7th Framework Programm [ICT-2007.4.3 Digital libraries and technology-enhanced learning] |website= |year=2009 |accessdate=2009-11-30 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100211235046/http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=FP7_PROJ_EN&ACTION=D&DOC=14&CAT=PROJ&QUERY=011f6d8aa49a%3A9a36%3A4c327c02&RCN=89496 |archivedate=2010-02-11 }}
112. ^{{Cite book|title = Preserving Complex Digital Objects|last = Delve|first = Janet|publisher = Facet|year = 2014|isbn = |location = London|first2 = David|last2 = Anderson}}
113. ^{{cite web|last=American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works |title=Resource Center: Caring For Your Treasures |url=http://www.conservation-us.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=630 |accessdate=5 March 2013 |year=2013 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20101203013005/https://www.conservation-us.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageId=630 |archivedate=3 December 2010 }}
114. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/personalarchiving/padKit/resources.html |title=Personal Archiving - Digital Preservation (Library of Congress) |work=digitalpreservation.gov |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130303015031/http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/personalarchiving/padKit/resources.html |archivedate=2013-03-03 }}
115. ^{{cite web|url=http://mobisocial.stanford.edu/muse/ |title=Muse |accessdate=2013-03-06 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130322222818/http://mobisocial.stanford.edu/muse/ |archivedate=2013-03-22 }}
116. ^{{cite web|last=Library of Congress |title=Digital Preservation Outreach & Education |url=http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/education/ |work=Website |publisher=Library of Congress |accessdate=6 March 2013 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130317015730/http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/education/ |archivedate=17 March 2013 }}
117. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/education/curriculum.html |title=Curriculum - Digital Preservation Outreach and Education - Digital Preservation - Library of Congress |work=digitalpreservation.gov |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130201135018/http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/education/curriculum.html |archivedate=2013-02-01 }}
118. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/education/background.html |title=DPOE - Digital Preservation (Library of Congress) |work=digitalpreservation.gov |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130113151759/http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/education/background.html |archivedate=2013-01-13 }}
119. ^{{cite web|last=Fojtu |first=Andrea |title=Open Source versus Commercial Solutions for a Long-term Preservation in Digital Repositories |url=http://www.knihovna.zcu.cz/Caslin/Caslin09.pdf |work=CASLIN 2009. Institutional Online Repositories and Open Access |publisher=University of West Bohemia |accessdate=25 October 2012 |pages=79–80 |year=2009 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110718192454/http://www.knihovna.zcu.cz/Caslin/Caslin09.pdf |archivedate=July 18, 2011 }}

References

External links

https://web.archive.org/web/20170929152253/https://www.npmjs.com/package/archive.is|archive-date= September 29, 2017|deadurl=no}}