Re: [CODE4LIB] old stuff
Al, I'm not an archivist by trade, but I had some thoughts on the subject, (and the person who sits behind me is, so I bounced my ideas off her to make sure I'm not talking inanities). Anyway, here goes: I think when people look into archiving/storing digital media, they look at it as one question -- is it worthwhile to save/catalog/store this item? To me though, there are really two completely separate questions being asked here: 1.) Is the data on the disk unique or special in a way that makes the data itself (i.e the ones and zeros) valuable. 2.) Is the physical object itself unique or special in any way (including it being a unique copy, marginalia, notable owner, etc) that makes the physical object valuable or makes the item an "object d'arte". 2a.) As part of two, if the object itself is not unique or special, is it part of a larger collection or set that is unique or special (a complete collection of first print Sierra games, a disk used in a Cray that was used in some big scientific discovery, etc) Answering yes to one of these will probably incur a completely difference response than if yes was answered to the other. Some generic examples: 1.) I have a 5 1/4 with some of my old high school papers on them. In terms of data value, because it's the only copy of these items, the value of the data is high. Since the disks are generic floppies without significant markings, I'd value the worth of the physical object as low. Therein, best bet would be to transfer the data off using an old 5 1/4 drive and put the data into a more long-term archivable solution (cloud storage, steady state drive, etc). You can see how this example can be used on university or corporate archival materials -- the physical object has much less worth than the data contained therein. 2.) I have a first edition copy of Zork I on 5 1/4 disk (may even have box/instructions/box fluff). Here, the data on the disk is of low value -- there are copies of Zork I all over the internet and I essentially download a copy to my hard drive for free (or even play on my browser if I so choose). On the other hand, its an original copy of Zork I with box/fluff, so the value lies not in the data but the physical object itself. In this example, I would store the disk as per best practices (good tips found here: http://dlis.dos.state.fl.us/archives/preservation/magnetic/index.cfm). 3.) I have a copy of a Final Fantasy cartridge for the original Nintendo. Again, you can get the data pretty readily for a large pool of resources, so the data itself is of little value. Final Fantasy carts are pretty common too, so the value of the object itself is pretty low. On the otherhand, the cart is part of a complete collection of Nintendo cartridges and licensed merchandise, so the value in this object now lies in the fact that it exists within a collection, and has value due to that collection. (Plus, it's always better to play a game on the original machine than play it on your Android, loading screen times notwithstanding...) A similar example would be blank punchcards for an old Sinclair ZX81 -- the cards themselves don't have value, but added to the Sinclair as a "complete package" they suddenly do. Other items from your post: Hardware: eBay is your best friend. You can rebuild your Tandy 1000 from parts on eBay. You can buy a complete and whole Tandy 1000 on eBay. I buy used car parts all the time on eBay to keep my junkers running, same principle can be applied to most old machines (fun fact: you can still buy parts for a DMC DeLorean on eBay). The only area you'll get stuck is if its media for a machine that REALLY old (much like parts for a very very old car). Software/Emulation: for examples that fall under "1", the good news is a majority of this material will usually be readable/obtainable since emulators for most old machine types already exist, and are almost always "free" (I just fired up my C64 emulator the other day). The most frequent snag I hear in this area is that data was saved in a proprietary format from some proprietary software, and that there isn't a good data interpreter available to read the data. Not much to do here except to see if you can fire up the old software (or in the worst case, break out your hex editor). Storage of these items can be done in the same way as your other digital assets -- store the original along with the functional copies/transcripts so that they're immediately usable but still allowing access to the original. Budget: It's exactly the same issues with this as with a special collection of books -- storage space, temperature control, curation, and collection. I strongly believe you can apply your print archival skills to digital media and not miss a beat. Yes, digital media archiving has budget issues, but so does every other collection type. This
[CODE4LIB] old stuff
Hello. I have a local question that I will assume to be general: how do those of you involved in special collections and the like - especially in the event that those collections are born digital and perhaps not entirely recent - deal with issues of evaluation of digital assets? One difficult example might be: sharing or procuring a specific kind of technical resource (where an "extreme" case might be, a 3.5" or 5.25" disk - or suppose it's DOS-era magnetic media, for an alternate challenge) among institutions who aren't prepared to amass collections of such. To me this touches on hardware, software, emulation, expertise and budget issues all at once. Thoughts? Thanks, -- Al Matthews, Software Dev, Atlanta University Center - ** The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies. ** IronMail scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious content. ** **
[CODE4LIB] FW: open-humanities Digest, Vol 20, Issue 11
Just thought it may interest some :) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 23:19:20 -0700 From: Jonathan Gray Subject: [open-humanities] On Machine Readable Reading Lists To: open-philosophy Cc: open-humanities Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Some thoughts on creating machine readable reading lists - in the first instance for philosophy departments in the UK: http://jonathangray.org/2012/03/26/on-machine-readable-reading-lists/ J. -- Jonathan Gray http://jonathangray.org -- ___ open-humanities mailing list open-humanit...@lists.okfn.org http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-humanities End of open-humanities Digest, Vol 20, Issue 11 ***
[CODE4LIB] Reminder: Pub Meetup in Ottawa, Ontario Wednesday March 28th
Just a reminder for anyone in Ottawa, Ontario tomorrow that there will be an informal code4lib North pub meetup at the Royal Oak downtown. The response so far has been very good with almost 20 people confirmed. If you haven't already RSVP'd, don't worry -- drop-ins are very welcome, too! Date: Wednesday March 28, 5-7 PM Location: Royal Oak on Bank and Gloucester, 181 Bank Street (on the corner across from L’Esplanade Laurier). http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/North#Code4lib_North_Pub_Night_Meetup_in_Ottawa.2C_Ontario See you tomorrow night! Warren
Re: [CODE4LIB] presenting merged records?
Hi Graham, do I know you from RHUL? My thoughts on "merged records" would be: 1. don't do it - use separate IDs and just present links between related manifestations; thus avoiding potential confusions. http://www.bic.org.uk/files/pdfs/identification-digibook.pdf possible relationships - see http://www.editeur.org/ONIX/book/codelists/current.html - lists 51 (manifestation)and 164 (work). 2. c.f. the way Amazon displays rough and ready categories (paperback, hardback, audiobooks, *ahem* ebooks of some sort...) On dissection and reconstitution of records - there is a lot of talk going on about RDFizing MaRC records and re-using in various ways, e.g.: http://www.slideshare.net/JenniferBowen/moving-library-metadata-toward-linked-data-opportunities-provided-by-the-extensible-catalog Cheers, Michael -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of graham Sent: 27 March 2012 11:06 To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: [CODE4LIB] presenting merged records? Hi There seems to be a general trend to presenting merged records to users, as part of the move towards FRBRization. If records need merging this generally means they weren't totally identical to start with, so you can end up with conflicting bibliographic data to display. Two examples I've come across with this: Summon can merge print/electronic versions of texts, so uses a new 'merged' material type of 'book/ebook' (it doesn't yet seem to have all the other possible permutations, eg book/audiobook). Pazpar2 (which I'm working with at the moment) has a merge option for publication dates which presents dates as a period eg 1997-2002. The problem is not with the underlying data (the original unmerged values can still be there in the background) but how to present them to the user in an intuitive way. With the date example, presenting dates in this format sometimes throws people as it looks too much like the author birth/death dates you might see with a record. I guess people must generally be starting to run into this kind of display problem, so it has maybe been discussed to death on ... wherever it is people talk about FRBRIzation. Any suggestions? Any mailing lists, blogs etc any can recommend for me to look at? Thanks for any ideas Graham
[CODE4LIB] presenting merged records?
Hi There seems to be a general trend to presenting merged records to users, as part of the move towards FRBRization. If records need merging this generally means they weren't totally identical to start with, so you can end up with conflicting bibliographic data to display. Two examples I've come across with this: Summon can merge print/electronic versions of texts, so uses a new 'merged' material type of 'book/ebook' (it doesn't yet seem to have all the other possible permutations, eg book/audiobook). Pazpar2 (which I'm working with at the moment) has a merge option for publication dates which presents dates as a period eg 1997-2002. The problem is not with the underlying data (the original unmerged values can still be there in the background) but how to present them to the user in an intuitive way. With the date example, presenting dates in this format sometimes throws people as it looks too much like the author birth/death dates you might see with a record. I guess people must generally be starting to run into this kind of display problem, so it has maybe been discussed to death on ... wherever it is people talk about FRBRIzation. Any suggestions? Any mailing lists, blogs etc any can recommend for me to look at? Thanks for any ideas Graham
