WP21 Preservation services: amending the DoW

The idea is to use this page to amend the text for the WP description in the DoW. Please edit this wiki page directly, and use the "insert" and "delete" mark-up to show changes, as illustrated:

Here is some unchanged text.
<ins>Here is some text to be inserted.</ins>
<del>Here is some text to be deleted.</del>
Here is some more unchanged text

Start month End month WP leader
11 26 STFC


A preservation service is understood to be of general applicability—not specific to the preservation activity of a particular organisation—and something that could, in principle, be offered by a third party—so not a desktop tool. There are of course blurred boundaries between services and tools, but the general distinction will be kept in mind. The aim of this work package is to characterise a set of services covering the spectrum of needs of digital preservation and to examine what services already exist, are under development, or have potential for development the preservation services which can be shared between organisations. As noted in section B1.3, the starting point will be the PARSE.Insight roadmap. A critical part of the process will be to analyse the range of services in terms of their applicability to confront each of the competing proponents with different views and different types of digitally encoded information. This will be done through dedicated internal workshops and testbeds from WP1400.

It is possible that some of the techniques will be found to be of limited applicabilityunsatisfactory but it might also be expected that as one challenges different approaches one sees that each is applicable to particular disciplines or specific types of digital objects; however some may be seen to be generally applicable. We are seeking to identify both the general, infrastructure-type components as well as delimiting the applicability of specific servicestools and techniques. Of particular importance is that the preservation services will at least address the services described by the PARSE.Insight Roadmap.

This will form part of the common vision of APARSEN, and feed into the Virtual Centre of Excellence, for which provision of services is a possible activity and source of revenue.

Description of work and role of partners

Task 2110 Collection of preservation services

This task will gather a preliminary set of services that already exist or are under development, drawing on the knowledge of the participants. identify the broad requirements and design constraints for shared preservation services. The initial set of services will be characterised in terms ofbased on the technical components in the PARSE.Insight roadmap [2]. This includes services to counter the fundamental threats to digital preservation identified in the PARSE.Insight survey. * Registry services for Representation Information

  • Services to capture knowledge about changes in hardware, software, environment and things which affect the Knowledgebase of Designated Communities and to stimulate the creation of required Representation Information.
  • Services to audit and certify repositories
  • Storage services which look after Provenance and other components of an Archival Information Package

These were illustrated in the CASPAR diagram of preservation workflows.

A number of e-Infrastructure projects are underway; in particular SCIDIP-ES [REF] aims at putting production level services in place based on the CASPAR conceptual model which we know is consistent with the PARSE.Insight roadmap. However we know that EUDAT [REF] also aims at producing services to help preservation. The requirements from these and other projects will be critically evaluated, especially from the point of view of the memory institutions which are not well represented in the e-Infrastructure projects.

Some of the economic and social issues associated with these services are investigated in Stream 3.

Task 2120 Characterisation of preservation servicesPreservation workflow comparisons

This task will set up a multidimensional classification of arrange comparisons between preservation techniques and services in order to come to some common view of what services are common and where are the boundaries of applicability for the other techniques. The aim is to describe the "landscape" of services which will then be analysed with recommendations in the following task. This will be done by challenging the services with a range of scenarios and types of data.various proponents with data outside their normal comfort zones in dedicated internal workshops. Data types would include static, dynamic, complex, simple etc described in [REF]; preservation would be tested against the common testbed environments from WP1400.

Task 2130 Prospects for preservation servicesPreservation service definitions

This task will map out the landscape of preservation services which will help organisations preserve their digital holdings against changes including in hardware, software, environment and knowledge bases of designated communities. Based on the characterisation set up in the previous task, features will be identified such as:

  • promising current directions
  • gaps in coverage implying priorities for service development
  • domain-specific considerations

List of deliverables

  • D21.1 OverviewDesign of preservation services (M24)

Description of deliverables

D21.1) OverviewDesign of preservation services: This deliverable will summarise the services surveyed, describe the classification scheme adopted, and give the results of the analysis of the landscape of services. list the categorised requirements of the various user communities and the actual operative definition of the services to fulfil those requirements. It will be based on the available technologies and oriented towards the possible research developments (so it will be not just be a theoretical roadmap). The key point is that this deliverable should demonstrate a high degree of the user communities ‘consensus’ on the services requirements illustrated in the PARSE.Insight surveys, case studies and Roadmap, supplemented by any similarly extensive body of evidence. [month 24]

IDEA! Implications of loss of Philips, Microsoft and IKI-RAS

Philips had 3 pm, Microsoft 2, IKI-RAS 7 (none spent). The loss of Philips can be covered by other partners representing the "user" perspective, particularly given the plan to seek input from data holding partners outside the WP. IKI-RAS would have represented another user angle, space data, which hopefully can be covered by other science data holders; the figure of 7 pm was probably unrealistic. Microsoft could have contributed a view of services as a supplier; however Tessella remains, as a specialist in the digital preservation area and with knowledge of the competitors. Furthermore, input from SCIDIP and EUDAT can be taken into account, which was not known to be available at the time the original DoW was drawn up. Thus no change or action is needed due to these withdrawals.

Further revisions in response to feedback from Project Officer 12th/14th December

PO's comment on this WP:

"Be clearer about research input of WP (not just a summary of what is available)"

Response is to add the following text before the last paragraph:

"The research aspect of this work package is the mapping of the space of potential services and the analysis of how that space is occupied and where further efforts are needed. A relationship will also be made to the requirements of different domains, as a further dimension of analysis. This goes beyond a simple summary list of what services are available."

-- SimonLambert - 2012-10-03

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r7 < r6 < r5 < r4 < r3 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r7 - 2012-12-27 - SimonLambert
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback