Menu Close

Category: electronic records

Google, Privacy, Records Managment and Archives

6 Comments

BoingBoing.net posted on March 14 and March 15 about Google’s announcement of a plan to change their log retention policy . Their new plan is to strip parts of IP data from records in order to protect privacy. Read more in the AP article covering the announcement.

For those who are not familiar with them – IP addresses are made up of sets of numbers and look something like 192.39.288.3. To see how good a job they can do figuring out the location you are in right now – go to IP Address or IP Address Guide (click on ‘Find City’).

Google currently keeps IP addresses and their corresponding search requests in their log files (more on this in the personal info section of their Privacy Policy). Their new plan is that after 18-24 months they will permanently erase part of the IP address, so that the address no longer can point to a single computer – rather it would point to a set of 256 computers (according to the AP article linked above).

Their choice to permanently redact these records after a set amount of time is interesting. They don’t want to get rid of the records – just remove the IP addresses to reduce the chance that those records could be traced back to specific individuals. This policy will be retroactive – so all log records more than 18-24 months old will be modified.

I am not going to talk about how good an idea this is.. or if it doesn’t go far enough (plenty of others are doing that, see articles at EFF and Wired: 27B Stroke 6 ). I want to explore the impact of choices like these on the records we will have the opportunity to preserve in archives in the future.

With my ‘archives’ hat on – the bigger question here is how much the information that Google captures in the process of doing their business could be worth to the historians of the future. I wonder if we will one day regret the fact that the only way to protect the privacy of those who have done Google searches is to erase part of the electronic trail. One of the archivist tenants is to never do anything to the record you cannot undo. In order for Google to succeed at their goal (making the records useless to government investigators) – it will HAVE to be done such that it cannot be undone.

In my information visualization course yesterday, our professor spoke about how great maps are at tying information down. We understand maps and they make a fabulous stable framework upon which we can organize large volumes of information. It sounds like the new modified log records would still permit a general connection to the physical geographic world – so that is a good thing. I do wonder if the ‘edited’ versions of the log records will still permit the grouping of search requests such that they can be identified as having been performed by the same person (or at least from the same computer)? Without the context of other searches by the same person/computer, would this data still be useful to a historian? Would being able to examine the searches of a ‘community’ of 256 computers be useful (if that is what the IP updates mean).

What if Google could lock up the unmodified version of those stats in a box for 100 years (and we could still read the media it is recorded on and we had documentation telling us what the values meant and we had software that could read the records)? What could a researcher discover about the interests of those of us who used Google in 2007? Would we loose a lot by if we didn’t know what each individual user searched for? Would it be enough to know what a gillion groups of 256 people/computers from around the world were searching for – or would loosing that tie to an individual turn the data into noise?

Privacy has been such a major issue with the records of many businesses in the past. Health records and school records spring to mind. I also find myself thinking of Arthur Anderson who would not have gotten into trouble for shredding their records if they had done so according to their own records disposition schedules and policies. Googling Electronic Document Retention Policy got me over a million hits. Lots of people (lawyers in particular) have posted articles all over the web talking about the importance of a well implemented Electronic Document Retention Policy. I was intrigued by the final line of a USAToday article from January 2006 about Google and their battle with the government over a pornography investigation:

Google has no stated guidelines on how long it keeps data, leading critics to warn that retention could be for years because of inexpensive data-storage costs.

That isn’t true any longer.

For me, this choice by Google has illuminated a previously hidden perfect storm. That the US government often request of this sort of log data is clear, though Google will not say how often. The intersection of concerns about privacy, government investigations, document retention and tremendous volumes of private sector business data seem destined to cause more major choices such as the one Google has just announced. I just wonder what the researchers of the future will think of what we leave in our wake.

Read more →

The Archives and Archivists Listserv: hoping for a stay of execution

1 Comment

There has been a lot of discussion (both on the Archives & Archivists (A&A) Listserv and in blog posts) about the SAA‘s recent decision to not preserve the A&A listserv posts from 1996 through 2006 when they are removed from the listserv’s old hosting location at Miami University of Ohio.

Most of the outcry against this decision has fallen into two camps:

  • Those who don’t understand how the SAA task force assigned to appraise the listserv archives could decide it does not have informational value – lots of discussion about how the listserv reflects the move of archivists into the digital age as well as it’s usefulness for students
  • Those who just wish it wouldn’t go away because they still use it to find old posts. Some mentioned that there are scholarly papers that reference posts in the listserv archives as their primary sources.

I added this suggestion on the listserv:

I would have thought that the Archives Listserv would be the ideal test case for developing a set of best practices for archiving an organization’s web based listserv or bboard.

Perhaps a graduate student looking for something to work on as an independent project could take this on? Even if they only got permission for working with posts from 2001 onward [post 2001 those who posted had to agree to ‘terms of participation’ that reduce issues with copyright and ownership] – I suspect it would still be worthwhile.

I have always found that you can’t understand all the issues related to a technical project (like the preservation of a listserv) until you have a real life case to work on. Even if SAA doesn’t think we need to keep the data forever – here is the perfect set of data for archivists to experiment with. Any final set of best practices would be meant for archivists to use in the future – and would be all the easier to comprehend if they dealt with a listserv that many of them are already familiar with.

Another question: couldn’t the listserv posts still be considered ‘active records’? Many current listserv posters claim they still access the old list’s archives on a regular basis. I would be curious what the traffic for the site is. That is one nice side effect of this being on a website – it makes the usage of records quantifiable.

There are similar issues in the analog world when records people still want to use loose their physical home and are disposed of but, as others have also pointed out, digital media is getting cheaper and smaller by the day. We are not talking about paying rent on a huge wharehouse or a space that needs serious temperature and humidity control.

I was glad to see Rick Prelinger’s response on the current listerv that simply reads:

The Internet Archive is looking into this issue.

I had already checked when I posted my response to the listerv yesterday – having found my way to the A&A old listserv page in the Wayback Machine. For now all that is there is the list of links to each week’s worth of postings – nothing beyond that has been pulled in.

I have my fingers crossed that enough of the right people have become aware of the situation to pull the listserv back from the brink of the digital abyss.

Read more →

NARA’s Electronic Records Archives in West Virginia

4 Comments

“WVU, NATIONAL ARCHIVES PARTNER” from http://wvutoday.wvu.edu/news/page/5419/

In a press release dated February 28, 2007, the National Archives and Records Administration of the United States (NARA) and West Virginia University (WVU) declared they had signed “a Memorandum of Understanding to establish a 10-year research and educational partnership in the study of electronic records and the promotion of civic awareness of the use of electronic records as educational resources.” It goes on to say that the two organizations “will engage in collaborative research and associated educational activities” including “research in the preservation and long-term access to complex electronic records and engineering design documentation.” WVU will receive “test collections” of electronic records from NARA to support their research and educational activities.

This sounded interesting. I stumbled across this on NARA’s website while looking for something else. No blog chatter or discussions about what this means for electronic records research (thinking of course of the big Footnote.com announcement and all the back and forth discussion that inspired). So I went hunting to see if I could find the actual Memorandum of Understanding. No sign of it. I did find WVU’s press release which included the photo above. This next quote is in the press release as well:

The new partnership complements NARA’s establishment of the Electronic Records Archives Program operations at the U.S. Navy’s Allegany Ballistics Laboratory in Rocket Center near Keyser in Mineral County.

Googling Allegany Ballistics Laboratory got me information about how it is a superfund site that is in late or final stages of cleanup. It also led me to an article from Senator Byrd about how pleased he was in October of 2006 about a federal spending bill that included funds for projects at ABL – including a sentence mentioning how NARA “will use the Mineral County complex for its electronic records archive program.” No mention of this on the Electronic Records Archive (ERA) website or on their special press release page. I don’t see any info about any NARA installations in West Virginia on their Locations webpage .

Then I found the WVU newspaper The Daily Athenaeum and an article titled “National Archives, WVU join forces ” dated March 1, 2007. (If the link gives you trouble – just search on the Athenaeum site for NARA and it should come right up.) The following quote is from the article:

”This is a tremendous opportunity for WVU. The National Archives has no other agreements like this with anyone else,” said John Weete, WVU’s vice president for research and economic development.

The University will help the NARA develop the next generation of technologies for the Electronic Records Archives. WVU will also assist in the management of NARA’s tremendous amount of data, Weete said.

”This is a great opportunity for students. The Archives will look for students who are masters at handling records and who care about the documents (for future job opportunities), ” said WVU President David Hardesty.

WVU students and faculty will hopefully soon have access to the Rocket Center archives, and faculty will be overseeing the maintenance of such records, Hardesty said.

Perhaps I am reading more into this than was intended, but I am confused. I was unable to find any information on the WVU website about an MLS or Archival Studies program there. I checked in both the ALA’s LIS directory and the SAA’s Directory of Archival Education to confirm there are no MLS or Archives degree programs in West Virginia. So where are the “students who are masters at handling records” going to come from? I work daily in the world of software development and I can imagine Computer Scientists who are interested in electronic records and their preservation. But as I have discovered many times over during my archives coursework there are a lot of important and unique ideas to learn in order to understand everything that is needed for the archival preservation of electronic records for “the life of the republic” (as NARA’s ERA project is so fond of saying).

I am pleased for WVU to have made such a landmark agreement with NARA to study and further research into the preservation and educational use of electronic records. Unfortunately I am also suspicious of this barely mentioned bit about the Rocket Center archives and ABL and how WVU is going to help NARA manage their data.

Has anyone else heard more about this?

Update (03/07/07):

Thanks to Donna in the comments for suggesting that WVU’s program is in ‘Public History’ (a aterm I had not thought to look under). This is definitely more reassuring.

WVU appears to offer both a Certificate in Cultural Resource Management and a M.A. in Public History – both described here on the Cultural Resource Management and Public History Requirements page.

The page listing History Department graduate courses included the two ‘public history’ courses listed below:

412 Introduction to Public History. 3 hr. Introduction to a wide range of career possibilities for historians in areas such as archives, historical societies, editing projects, museums, business, libraries, and historic preservation. Lectures, guest speakers, field trips, individual projects.

614 Internship in Public History. 6 hr. PR: HIST 212 and two intermediate public history courses. A professional internship at an agency involved in a relevant area of public history. Supervision will be exercised by both the Department of History and the host agency. Research report of finished professional project required.

Read more →

Understanding Born Digital Records: Journalists and Archivists with Parallel Challenges

3 Comments

My most recent Archival Access class had a great guest speaker from the Journalism department. Professor Ira Chinoy is currently teaching a course on Computer-Assisted Reporting. In the first half of the session, he spoke about ways that archival records can fuel and support reporting. He encouraged the class to brainstorm about what might make archival records newsworthy. How do old records that have been stashed away for so long become news? It took a bit of time, but we got into the swing of it and came up with a decent list. He then went through his own list and gave examples of published news stories that fit each of the scenarios.

In the second half of class he moved on to address issues related to the freedom of information and struggling to gain access to born digital public records. Journalists are usually early in the food chain of those vying for access to and understanding of federal, state and local databases. They have many hurdles. They must learn what databases are being kept and figure out which ones are worth pursuing. Professor Chinoy relayed a number of stories about the energy and perseverance required to convince government officials to give access to the data they have collected. The rules vary from state to state (see the Maryland Public Information Act as an example) and journalists often must quote chapter and verse to prove that officials are breaking the law if they do not hand over the information. There are officials who deny that the software they use will even permit extractions of the data – or that there is no way to edit the records to remove confidential information. Some journalists find themselves hunting down the vendors of proprietary software to find out how to perform the extract they need. They then go back to the officials with that information in the hopes of proving that it can be done. I love this article linked to in Prof. Chinoy’s syllabus: The Top 38 Excuses Government Agencies Give for Not Being Able to Fulfill Your Data Request (And Suggestions on What You Should Say or Do).

After all that work – just getting your hands on the magic file of data is not enough. The data is of no use without the decoder ring of documentation and context.

I spent most of the 1990s designing and building custom databases, many for federal government agencies. There are an almost inconceivable number of person hours that go into the creation of most of these systems. Stakeholders from all over the organization destined to use the system participate in meetings and design reviews. Huge design documents are created and frequently updated … and adjustments to the logic are often made even after the system goes live (to fix bugs or add enhancements). The systems I am describing are built using complex relational databases with hundreds of tables. It is uncommon for any one person to really understand everything in it – even if they are on the IT team for the full development life cycle.

Sometimes you get lucky and the project includes people with amazing technical writing skills, but usually those talented people are aimed at writing documentation for users of the system. Those documents may or may not explain the business processes and context related to the data. They will rarely expose the relationship between a user’s actions on a screen and the data as it is stored in the underlying tables. Some decisions are only documented in the application code itself and that is not likely to be preserved along with the data.

Teams charged with the support of these systems and their users often create their own documents and databases to explain certain confusing aspects of the system and to track bugs and their fixes. A good analogy here would be to the internal files that archivists often maintain about a collection – the notes that are not shared with the researchers but instead help the archivists who work with the collection remember such things as where frequently requested documents are or what restrictions must be applied to certain documents.

So where does that leave those who are playing detective to understand the records in these systems? Trying to figure out what the data in the tables mean based on the understanding of end-users can be a fool’s errand – and that is if you even have access to actual users of the system in the first place. I don’t think there is any easy answer given the realities of how many unique systems of managing data are being used throughout the public sector.

Archivists often find themselves struggling with the same problems. They have to fight to acquire and then understand the records being stored in databases. I suspect they have even less chance of interacting with actual users of the original system that created the records – though I recall discussions in my appraisal class last term about all the benefits of working with the producers of records long before they are earmarked to head to the archives. Unfortunately, it appeared that this was often the exception rather than the rule – even if it is the preferred scenario.

The overly ambitious and optimistic part had the idea that what ‘we’ really need is a database that lists common commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) packages used by public agencies – along with information on how to extract and redact data from these packages. For those agencies using custom systems, we could include any information on what company or contractors did the work – that sort of thing can only help later. Or how about just a list of which agencies use what software? Does something like this exist? The records of what technology is purchased are public record – right? Definitely an interesting idea (for when I have all that spare time I dream about). I wonder if I set up a wiki for people to populate with this information if people would share what they already know.

I would like to imagine a future world in which all this stuff is online and you can login and download any public record you like at any time. You can get a taste of where we are on the path to achieving this dream on the archives side of things by exploring a single series of electronic records published on the US National Archives site. For example, look at the search screen for World War II Army Enlistment Records. It includes links to sample data, record group info and an FAQ. Once you make it to viewing a record – every field includes a link to explain the value. But even this extensive detail would not be enough for someone to just pick up these records and understand them – you still need to understand about World War II and Army enlistment. You still need the context of the events and this is where the FAQ comes in. Look at the information they provide – and then take a moment to imagine what it would take for a journalist to recreate a similar level of detailed information for new database records being created in a public agency today (especially when those records are guarded by officials who are leery about permitting access to the records in the first place).

This isn’t a new problem that has appeared with born digital records. Archivists and journalists have always sought the context of the information with which they are working. The new challenge is in the added obstacles that a cryptic database system can add on top of the already existing challenges of decrypting the meaning of the records.

Archivists and Journalists care about a lot of the same issues related to born digital records. How do we acquire the records people will care about? How do we understand what they mean in the context of why and how they were created? How do we enable access to the information? Where do we get the resources, time and information to support important work like this?

It is interesting for me find a new angle from which to examine rapid software development. I have spent so much of my time creating software based on the needs of a specific user community. Usually those who are paying for the software get to call the shots on the features that will be included. Certain industries do have detailed regulations designed to promote access by external observers (I am thinking of applications related to medical/pharmaceutical research and perhaps HAZMAT data) but they are definitely exceptions.

Many people are worrying about how we will make sure that the medium upon which we record our born digital records remains viable. I know that others are pondering how to make sure we have software that can actually read the data such that it isn’t just mysterious 1s and 0s. What I am addressing here is another aspect of preservation – the preservation of context. I know this too is being worried about by others, but while I suspect we can eventually come up with best practices for the IT folks to follow to ensure we can still access the data itself – it will ultimately be up to the many individuals carrying on their daily business in offices around the world to ensure that we can understand the information in the records. I suppose that isn’t new either – just another reason for journalists and archivists to make their voices heard while the people who can explain the relationships between the born digital records and the business processes that created them are still around to answer questions.

Read more →

Spring 2007:Access and Information Visualization

5 Comments

I don’t often post explicitly about my experiences as a graduate student – but I want to let everyone know about the focus of my studies for the next four months. I am taking two courses that I hope will complement one another. One course is on Archival Access (description, MARC, DACS, EAD and theory). The other is on Information Visualization over in the Computer Science department.

My original hope was that in my big Information Visualization final project I might get the opportunity to work with some aspect of archives and/or digital records. I want to understand how to improve access and understanding of the rich resources in the structured digital records repositories in archives around the world. What has already happened just one week into the term is that I find myself cycling through multiple points of view as I do my readings.

How can we support interaction with archival records by taking advantage of the latest information visualization techniques and tools? We can make it easier to understand what records are in a repository – both analog and digital records. I have been imagining interactive visual representations of archives collections, time periods, areas of interest and so forth. When you visit an archives’ website – it can often be so hard to get your head around the materials they offer. I suspect that this is often the case even when you are standing in the same building as the collections. In my course on appraisal last term we talked a lot about examining the collections that were already present on the path to creating a collecting policy. I am optimistic about ways that visualizing this information could improve everyone’s understanding of what an archives contains, for archivists and researchers alike.

Once I get myself to stop those daydreams… I move on to the next set of daydreams. What about the products of these visual analytics tools? How do we captured interactive visualizations in archives? This seems like a greater challenge than the average static digital record (as if there really is such an animal as an ‘average’ digital record). I can see a future in which major government and business decisions are made based on the interpretation of such interactive data models, graphs and charts. Instead of needing just the ‘records’ – don’t we need a way to recreate the experience that the original user had when interacting with the records?

This (unsurprisingly) takes me back to the struggle of how to define exactly what a record is in the digital world. Is the record a still image of a final visualization? Can this actually capture the full impact of an interactive and possible 3D visualization? With information visualization being such a rich and dynamic field I feel that there is a good chance that the race to create new methods and tools will zoom far ahead of plans to preserve its products.

I think some of my class readings will take extra effort (and extra time) as my mind cycles through these ideas. I think that a lot of this will come out in my posts over the next four months. And I still have strong hopes for rallying a team in my InfoViz class to work on an archives related project.

Read more →

Book Review: Digital Preservation

In my quest for information about archiving geospatial data last term, I got my hands on a copy of Marilyn Deegan and Simon Tanner’s Digital Preservation (part of the Digital Futures Series). This excellent volume consists of nine chapters each written by different authors who are leaders in their respective fields (shown in order of their respective chapters):

This fabulous band of writers and researchers were led by Marilyn Deegan and Simon Tanner, both based out of the King’s College London.

Published in 2006, this is one of the most comprehensive and up to date books I found on the subject. The book starts out with two chapters addressing the basic issues related to digital preservation. Subsequent chapters present information about all kinds of metadata, web archiving, the costs of digital preservation and an overview of European approaches. The final chapter presents an extensive series of case studies – complete with URLs to give you plently of information online to explore.

This book gave me a great foundation from which to explore the details of various geospatial data and GIS archiving efforts. For those faced with the challenge of planning for digital preservation, the two chapters on costs should be very useful. So many articles talk about how it will be so expensive to ensure proper digital preservation, but don’t give people in the field any practical advice in planning for the costs – this book is different. The exploration of existing approaches being used at major institutions throughout Europe give a good sense of evolving standards and best practices.

If you are looking for a way to get a handle on the issues involved in digital preservation – this a great starting point. The final chapter on case studies alone could keep you busy for a month as you explore all the websites of projects from around the world. While the book has a decidedly European focus, the concepts are applicable the world over. If you are responsible for ensuring that digital records (either digitized or born digital) are protected and preserved – this book explains the basics and explores various strategies. They don’t oversimplify things – but take the time to explain things well. They are honest about those questions that aren’t answered yet… and they point to as many resources, standards and examples as they can. While Digital Preservation cannot provide a formula for everyone to follow, it can help you start asking the right questions and begin to understand the possibilities.

Read more →

GIS and Geospatial Data Preservation: Research Resources

I found these websites while doing research for a paper on the selection and appraisal of geospatial data and geographic information systems (GIS). I hope these links might be useful for others doing similar research.

CIESIN – Center for International Earth Science Information Network at Columbia University, especially Guide to Managing Geospatial Electronic Records (USA)

CUGIR – Cornell University Geospatial Information Repository, especially Collection Development Policy (USA)

Digital Curation Center – supporting UK institutions who store, manage and preserve these data to help ensure their enhancement and their continuing long-term use, especially Curating Geospatial Data, especially Curating Geospatial Data (UK)

Digital Preservation Coalition – “established in 2001 to foster joint action to address the urgent challenges of securing the preservation of digital resources in the UK and to work with others internationally to secure our global digital memory and knowledge base.” Especially their Decision Tree. (UK)

GeoConnections – a Canadian national partnership program to evolve and expand the Canadian Geospatial Data Infrastructure (CGDI). (Canada)

InterPARES 2 Case Studies – especially CyberCartographic Atlas of Antarctica and Preservation of the City of Vancouver GIS Database (VanMap)

Library and Archives of Canada – especially Managing Cartographic, Architectural and Engineering Records in the Government of Canada (Canada)

Library of Congress Digital Preservation – subtitled “The National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program” (NDIIPP) (USA)

Maine GeoArchives (USA)

Maryland State Geographic Information Committee Standards for Records Preservation

NGDA – the National Geospatial Digital Archive, especially Collection Development Policy For The National Geospatial Digital Archive and UCSB Maps & Imagery Collection Development Policy (USA)

New York State Archives – especially GIS Development Guides: GIS Use and Maintenance (USA)

North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (USA)

North Carolina Geospatial Data Archiving Project – especially their NDIIPP proposal for Collection and Preservation of At Risk Digital Geospatial Data (USA)

OMB Circular No. A-16 – which requires the development of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) (USA)

Any great sites I am missing? Please let me know and I will add to the list.

Read more →

The Edges of the GIS Electronic Record

3 Comments

I spent a good chunk of the end of my fall semester writing a paper ultimately titled “Digital Geospatial Records: Challenges of Selection and Appraisal”. I learned a lot – especially with the help of archivists out there on the cutting edge who are trying to find answers to these problems. I plan on a number of posts with various ideas from my paper.

To start off, I want to consider the topic of defining the electronic record in the context of GIS. One of the things I found most interesting in my research was the fact that defining exactly what a single electronic record consists of is perhaps one of the most challenging steps.

If we start with the SAA’s glossary definition of the term ‘record’ we find the statement that “A record has fixed content, structure, and context.” The notes go on to explain:

Fixity is the quality of content being stable and resisting change. To preserve memory effectively, record content must be consistent over time. Records made on mutable media, such as electronic records, must be managed so that it is possible to demonstrate that the content has not degraded or been altered. A record may be fixed without being static. A computer program may allow a user to analyze and view data many different ways. A database itself may be considered a record if the underlying data is fixed and the same analysis and resulting view remain the same over time.

This idea presents some major challenges when you consider data that does not seem ‘fixed’. In the fast moving and collaborative world of the internet, Geographic Information Systems are changing over time – but the changes themselves are important. We no longer live in a world in which the way you access a GIS is via a CD which has a specific static version of the map data you are considering.

One of the InterPARES 2 case studies I researched for my paper was the Preservation of the City of Vancouver GIS database (aka VanMap). Via a series of emails exchanged with the very helpful Evelyn McLellan (who is working on the case study) I learned that the InterPARES 2 researchers concluded that the entire VanMap system is a single record. This decision was based on the requirement of ‘archival bond’ to be present in order for a record to exist. I have included my two favorite definitions of archival bond from the InterPARES 2 dictionary below:

archival bond
n., The network of relationships that each record has with the records belonging in the same aggregation (file, series, fonds). [Archives]

n., The originary, necessary and determined web of relationships that each record has at the moment at which it is made or received with the records that belong in the same aggregation. It is an incremental relationship which begins when a record is first connected to another in the course of action (e.g., a letter requesting information is linked by an archival bond to the draft or copy of the record replying to it, and filed with it. The one gives meaning to the other). [Archives]

I especially appreciate the second definition above because it’s example gives me a better sense of what is meant by ‘archival bond’ – though I need to do more reading on this to get a better grasp of it’s importance.

Given the usage of VanMap by public officials and others, you can imagine that the state of the data at any specific time is crucial to determining the information used for making key decisions. Since a map may be created on the fly using multiple GIS layers but never saved or printed – it is only the knowledge that someone looked at the information at a particular time that would permit those down the road to look through the eyes of the decision makers of the past. Members of the VanMap team are now working with the Sustainable Archives & Library Technologies (SALT) lab at the San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC) to use data grid technology to permit capturing the changes to VanMap data over time. My understanding is that a proof of concept has been completed that shows how data from a specific date can be reconstructed.

In contrast with this approach we can consider what is being done to preserve GIS data by the Archivist of Maine in the Maine GeoArchives. In his presentation titled “Managing GIS in the Digital Archives” delivered at the 2006: Joint Annual Meeting of NAGARA, COSA, and SAA on August 3, 2006, Jim Henderson explained their approach of appraising individual layers to determine if they should be accessioned in the archive. If it is determined that the layer should be preserved, then issues of frequency of data capture are addressed. They have chosen a pragmatic approach and are currently putting these practices to the test in the real world in an ambitious attempt to prevent data loss as quickly as is feasible.

My background is as a database designer and developer in the software industry. In my database life, a record is usually a row in a database table – but when designing a database using Entity-Relationship Modeling (and I will admit I am of the “Crow’s Feet” notation school and still get a smile on my face when I see the cover of the CASE*Method: Entity Relationship Modelling book) I have spent a lot of time translating what would have been a single ‘paper record’ into the combination of rows from many tables.

The current system I am working on includes information concerning legal contracts. Each of these exists as a single paper document outside the computers – but in our system we distribute information that is needed to ‘rebuild’ the contract into many different tables. One for contact information – one for standard clauses added to all the contracts of this type – another set of tables for defining financial formulas associated with the contract. If I then put on my archivist hat and I didn’t just choose to keep the paper agreement, I would of course draw my line around all these different records needed to rebuild the full contract. I see that there is a similar definition listed as the second definition on the InterPARES 2 Terminology Dictionary for the term ‘Record‘:

n., In data processing, a grouping of interrelated data elements forming the basic unit of a file. A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology (The Society of American Archivists)

Just in this brief survey we can see three very different possible views on where to draw a line around what constitutes a single Geographic Information System electronic record. Is it the entire database, a single GIS layer or some set of data elements which create a logical record? Is it worthwhile trying to contrast the definition of a GIS record with the definition of a record when considering analog paper maps? I think the answer to all of these questions is ‘sometimes’.

What is especially interesting about coming up with standard approaches to archiving GIS data is that I don’t believe there is one answer. Saying ‘GIS data’ is about as precise as saying ‘database record’ or ‘entity’ – it could mean anything. There might be a best answer for collaborative online atlases.. and another best answer for state government managed geographic information library.. and yet another best answer for corporations dependent on GIS data for doing their business.

I suspect that it will be via thorough analysis of the information stored in a GIS system, how it is/was created, how often it changes and how it was used that will determine the right approach for archiving these born digital records. There are many archivists (and IT folks and map librarians and records managers) around the world who have a strong sense of panic over the imminent loss of geospatial data. As a result, people from many fields are trying different approaches to stem the loss. It will be interesting to consider these varying approaches (and their varying levels of success) over the next few years. We can only hope that a few best practices will rise to the top quickly enough that we can ensure access to vital geospatial records in the future.

Read more →