Task Force on Digital Repository Certification

This site was frozen in 2004 and is now out of date. Please go to RLG's current Web site for all information. Questions? Contact us.

RLG and Preservation

Task Force on Digital Repository Certification

Introduction

RLG and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) are the joint creators of this task force. Its purpose is to produce certification requirements for establishing and selecting reliable digital information repositories.

This effort is part of ongoing work with the Open Archival Information System (OAIS) model, and RLG and NARA intend the results to go into the standardization process through the International Organization of Standardization (ISO) Archiving Series.

Membership

Bruce Ambacher, National Archives and Records Administration, co-chair
Kevin Ashley, University of London Computing Centre
Connie Brooks, Stanford University
Josh Coates, Internet Archive
Judith Cobb, OCLC
Robin Dale, RLG, co-chair
Dale Flecker, Harvard University
David Giaretta, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils, UK
Maggie Jones, Digital Preservation Coalition, UK
William LeFurgy, Library of Congress
Rich Lysakowski, Global Electronic Records Association/Collaborative Electronic Notebooks Systems Association
Julien Masanes, Bibliothèque nationale de France
Nancy McGovern, Cornell University
Don Sawyer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Johan Steenbakkers, Koninklijke Bibliotheek

Charge

Review recent literature and consult with appropriate organizations regarding standards, criteria, and mechanisms for certification.

Review and address applicability of existing certification options to digital repositories; address concepts of self-certification, objective (third-party) certification, and domain-specific requirements.

Identify a list of certifiable elements (attributes, processes, functions, activities) of a digital repository or types of repositories.

Create a standard certification process or a framework that can be implemented across domains or types of digital repositories.

Develop a certification plan:

identify certifying body or bodies;

identify timetable for execution and adherence;

identify frequency or cycle of certification;

create technical models;

if possible, create economic models for sustainability of independent certifying program/body; and

create implementation scenarios.

Define the conditions for revocation of certification and suggest appropriate action plans for endangered digital information.

Background

The nature and scope of digital information is so complex and vast that no one institution—or even one hundred—can be responsible for the preservation of the world's digital cultural heritage. In a world bound by a complex array of legal, ethical, cultural, and economic obligations, the imperative of long-term access to preserved information further complicates the roles and responsibilities required of digital repositories.

These challenges plus others were documented by an influential North American report in 1996: Preserving Digital Information, from the Task Force on the Archiving of Digital Information. Since then, RLG, NARA, and many other organizations and institutions have worked through a large array of projects, publications, and and collaborations to address problems and barriers identified in this report. These efforts have helped to advance the digital archiving infrastructure called for in the report and have contributed to the development of national—and even international—digital repositories.

A critical component of infrastructure is not yet in place. Effective digital archiving services require a shared understanding across stakeholders of what is to be done—and how—by known and trusted organizations. What is the mechanism for ensuring that a service is capable of reliably storing, migrating, and providing access to digital collections? As numerous working groups and reports have indicated, we need a process of digital repository certification as a means to measure a repository's ability to be deemed trustworthy.

A digital repository certification process should address the range of activities, functions, and responsibilities associated with repositories while providing layers of trust for all involved. It should yield a high degree of confidence that the information a repository disseminates is the same information that was ingested and preserved. And the certification process or framework must address the consequences of failure, including fail-safe mechanisms that would enable a certified archival repository to perform rescue of endangered digital information.

Find more at RLG's digital preservation home page.

Last updated January 2004

This site was frozen in 2004 and is now out of date. Please go to RLG's current Web site for all information. Questions? Contact us.
HOME | SEARCH | CONTACTS | USER SUPPORT