cost of digital archiving : is there an universal model...jean-daniel zeller cost of digital...

Cost of digital archiving : Is there an universal model ? Jean-Daniel ZELLER Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève

Table of contents 1. Chronological Reminder ........................................................................................... 1

2. Costs calculators ...................................................................................................... 4

3. Lessons .................................................................................................................... 7

4. The OAIS Model as a general frame of reflection ..................................................... 8

5. Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 11

6. Bibliography ............................................................................................................ 12

Costs Models.................................................................................................... 12

Costs Calculators (chronological) ..................................................................... 14

Other References ............................................................................................. 15

1. Chronological Reminder

The first consequent study about the costs of the conservation of digital data is that of Tony Hendley, sponsored by the British Library and JISC, published in 1998 [Hendley, 1998]. He establishes an almost exhaustive list of all the possible costs but does not quantify them. Among the identified costs those of conservation constitute a column (5.1.7), others include the costs of creation, acquisition, management of the data, description, use of the data and management of copyrights. According to their description we can consider that the costs of management of the data are, strictly speaking, also costs of conservation. The second part of the report applies this structure of costs to various data type such as: datasets, structured texts, office automation documents and images.

In 1999, the study of Stephen Puglia, of NARA, concentrated only on the costs of digitalization [Puglia, 1999]. The Study of Puglia bases itself on the actual costs of certain big American digitalization projects.

The same year, Kevin Ashley, in a communication in DLM Forum, tried to discern the factors determining cost Models [Ashley, 1999]. Through a fanciful formula he tries to demonstrate that the costs are not necessarily proportional to the volumes of the preserved data and that they are not so high (this was a faith collectively shared at the time, in the absence of concrete figures). He will further develop these considerations in an article in the Records Management Journal [Ashley, 2000].

Also in 2000, Granger, Russel and Weinberger published the first study exclusively centered on the costs of digital conservation [Granger, 2000]. They propose a new grid of analysis for the factors determining these costs: data types (formats), the associated copyright, and the control. The more these factors are complex, the more expensive they are. Another methodological

Jean-Daniel ZELLER Cost of digital archiving : where is the model ?

CostsDigitalArchiving _JDZ_ECA2010 2/15 28.04.2010

novelty of this report is to link the costs to the OAIS model. On this base the authors distinguish the following costs: selection, negotiation of the rights, technological choice of conservation, validation of quality, production of metadata, storage, and management. In this model, only the last two costs are the real costs of conservation as the first items are bound to the ingest phase of the OAIS model.

Again in 2000, Bruce Kingmann publishes in D-Lib Magazine a comparative study on the price of conservation of printed matters, microform cards and digital documents [Kingma, 2000]. His conclusion is that digital formats are only economic if they are shared by a community of libraries.

In 2003, Erpanet published a "Cost Orientation Tool" which summarizes the factors of costs in tabular form, organized in the following columns: objects, staffs, standards, practices, systems and methods, rules and policies, and organization [Erpanet, 2003]. The impacts of these various factors are described but are not calculated.

The same year, Stephen Chapman publishes an article in the Journal of Digital Information, comparing the costs of archives warehouses [Chapman, 2003]. For the first time it is about real costs based on the experience of Harvard University and the OCLC warehouse. The study is also interesting as far as the Harvard documents are stored under analog format while those of the OCLC are in digital format. In a general way figures supplied by Chapman indicate costs are comparatively very high for the digital data when compared with the analog data.

Shelby Sanett attempts a first synthesis by presenting in an article published in the RLG Diginews [Sanett, 2003], a series of tables, structured according to:

• capital investment costs (in capital) • the direct operational costs • the indirect operational costs (overheads)

Tables group together the following costs: • preservation of the electronic documents • use of the preserved electronic documents • linked to the populations of users • acquisition and preservation of electronic documents • use of institutions / Access outside of preserved electronic files

However, these tables do not present calculated values.

In 2004, Erik Oltmans of the Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB), presents one comparison model strictly concerning the costs of conservation by elaborating a model of comparison between the strategies of migration and emulation [Oltmans, 2004]. He also leans on the OAIS model. This model is commented upon in more detail in the chapter «Costs calculators» below.

The workshop on the cost models organized collectively by the Digital Preservation Coalition (DPC) and the Digital Curation Centre (DCC) in London in July, 2005 collects a whole series of contributions on the subject [DCC, 2005]. Nevertheless, most of the communications reflect



projects of research rather than accomplished models, with the exception of those presented by Erik Oltmans (see above) and the LIFE project (see below).

In the same period, the team of Dutch Digital Preservation Tesbed, published a study "Cost of Digital Preservation" that details in a calculated way the costs of conservation according to document types (e-mail, text, worksheet, database) and according to the strategies of conservation (migration versus emulation). [Digital Preservation Tesbed, 2005]

The same year, the LIFE Project publishes a review of research projects in connection with the life cycle of documents and costs [Watson, 2005]. It is a review of the literature, rather exhaustive, but particularly directed to libraries. Strictly speaking the costs of management of the rights and the digitalization are particularly described to the detriment of the costs of conservation (see chapter 8 of the document, which quotes a part of the references examined in this article). Other publications of the LIFE project are more interesting with regards to the cost models (see below).

Year 2007 saw the appearance of several interesting articles. First a publication of Moore and al., based on the actual costs of the Supercomputer Center of San Diego [Moore, 2007]. The article compares the costs of magnetic media, discs and tapes. The main conclusion is that the current cost of discs is three times that of equivalent capacity. Supports and their reading devices represent only a half of the costs, the other half being the work (20 %) and the indirect costs (maintenance and others, 26 %).

The LIFE Project also publishes a model of costs covering all the life cycle of the document and including the stages of acquisition, payment, management of metadata, storage, access and conservation [Wheatley, 2007]. The model is applied to three case studies (web archiving, e-newspapers and voluntary deposit of electronic publication). The article concludes with the necessity of developing calculation tools at all levels of the life cycle. This model is revised and appears modified in the final report of the second stage of the project published in 2008 [LIFE2, 2008]: creation, acquisition, payment, conservation of bit-steam, conservation of the contents, access. This second report also includes a better description of the various stages of conservation.

Finally in 2009, Ulla Bøgvad Kejser and al. published within the framework of iPress2009 a study on one of the elements of cost described in the project LIFE, the cost of migration [Bøgvad Kejser, 2009]. She describes the cost analysis by using the worksheets of the project LIFE applied to three cases of migration:

• of very badly documented data

• of homogeneous and documented data

• of voluminous files in the JPEG2000 format

Her conclusion is that the forecast model of the costs proposed by the LIFE model works globally but that certain costs show differences raised between elements foreseen in the model and those effectively noticed.



2. Costs calculators

At the same time as the publications quoted in the previous chapter, the need was felt to build more precise tools for the calculation of the costs, and the « putting in music » of the proposed calculation formulas. Most of these tools appear in the shape of worksheets that formalize by formulas the hypotheses of the costs. Below is a brief review, presented in the chronological order of publication.

Storage Costs per object per year , Erik Oltmans, [Storage Costs, 2004]

This model elaborated in the frame of the Koninklijke Bibliotheek compares only the costs of conservation according to the strategies of migration or emulation. It appears under the shape of a worksheet the main page of which shows a graph comparing the costs of emulation and migration through values introduced dynamically, according to the constraints of fixed costs. The second tab constitutes the tables used for the calculation. Variables introduced manually are:

• Costs of storage by object per year in $ (0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.10, 0.05, 1.00)

• Costs of migration by digital object in $ (0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.10, 0.05, 0.20)

• Initial costs of the emulation tool in $ (50'000, 100'000, 150'000, 200'000, 300'000,

500'000)

• Annual costs of emulation in $ (5'000, 10'000, 20'000, 30'000, 40'000, 50'000)

• Numbers of digital preserved objects (10'000, 100'000, 500'000, 1'000'000, 5'000'000,

10'000'000)

• Numbers of years of conservation (5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200)

The interest of this model is to very dynamically represent the cost factors according to their variation. This model is commented in [Oltmans, 2004]

Preservation Project Cost Calculator , IT Innovation Centres (under mandate of Digital Curation Center (DCC), [Cost Calculator, 2005] This model is built mainly to manage the digitalization of audiovisual holdings, with a ten-year estimate of the costs of digitalization, storage and access. It is a worksheet with 10 tabs:

1. Presupposed (indication of the volume of items in the collection and the annual rate of inflation)

2. Evaluation of the initial conditions (indication of the state of conservation by type of support)

3. Evaluation of the value (by type of contents with 4 values: inestimable, valid, commonplace, without interest)

4. Evaluation of supports (???) 5. Requirements of transfer (compilation of the previous tables) 6. Digitalization Plan (including the costs and the workload) 7. Digitized Products (conversion table of the volumes of minutes in Gbytes) 8. Storage Plan (calculation of the costs of storage over the time)



9. Access Plan (calculation of the costs of distribution of the digitized media) 10. Synthesis (ten-year table of digitalization, storage and access costs)

Digital Cost Model of Digital Preservation Tesbed [Costmodel, on 2005]

This tool appears under the form of three tabs: baseline costs, calculation of the work, calculation of the costs.

Baseline costs are:

1. Wage costs, expressed in hourly pay according to the level of competency (6 levels) 2. The costs of infrastructure, expressed in euro by square meter a year 3. The costs of hardware and software, expressed as a unit cost, multiplied by the number

of items used by the various functions

Various formulas allow the establishment of annual partial and total costs. Except for the calculation formulas, this table can be adjusted according to the real costs of every institution.

The calculation of the work consists of a double entry table with:

• conservation activities (Record keeping activities, Development of the preservation

approach, Digital Preservation Activities), and the persons associated with these activities.

• the types of documents processed (e-mail, text, worksheet, data base) and their format

(xml, migrated, etc.) The values are expressed in hours or in minutes by item, and are added at batch total time and annual total time.

The calculation of costs is the same double entry table but the values in time have been

multiplied by the values in euro taken from corresponding baseline costs. The use of this table and its results is commented in [Digital Preservation Tesbed, 2005].

Kakulations-Tool , of ILM-Unibas, [Kalkulation Tools, 2007]

This worksheet was developed by Imaging and Media Lab ( IML) of the University of Basel within the framework of its research on the digitalization of fixed or animated pictures. It is structured for the management of on demand projects of migration. It consists of a worksheet in three tabs. The first one is an index card with a brief description of batches. The second is a calculation sheet of the quarterly costs in two groups (plan A and B) allowing comparison of working hypotheses (the sheet presents two plans but we can imagine as many scenarios as we wish). The costs are calculated for new (?), check-up (check of the initial files), the migration, and the fixed costs of the computer infrastructure. The variable costs are: the hourly cost of the work, the cost of the material by terabyte, and the initial computer investment costs. The third sheet is an annual cumulative summary issuing from the previous sheet. There is no published documentation clarifying the choices of the proposed variables.



Life Generic Preservation Model , LIFE Project, [Life Model, 2008]

The LIFE project elaborated several models of costs according to the stages of the project, is: LIFE1:

VDEP Preservation model <http://www.life.ac.uk/1/docs/VDEPPreserve.xls>, developed for the voluntary deposits in British Library

Web BOW PRESERVATION MODEL <http://www.life.ac.uk/1/docs/WebArcPreserve.xls>, developed for Web-archiving of British Library

LIFE2:

The LIFE Generic Preservation Model v1.4 <http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/14128/>, generic model of costs

Spreadsheet for SHERPA DP Accommodates Study <http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/9062/3/9062.xls>,

and

Spreadsheet for SHERPA-LEAP Accommodates Study

<http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/9032/3/9032.xls>,

Developed for the e-publications of various universities

Spreadsheet for British Library Newspapers Case Study - Burney Digital Newspapers

<http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/9061/7/9061_Burney_Collection_Spreadsheet.xls>, and

Spreadsheet for British Library Newspapers Case Study - Legal Deposit of Newspapers

<http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/9061/6/9061_Legal_Deposit_Spreadsheet.xls>,

Developed for various collections of the British Library

These models are clarified in detail in the final report of the second phase of the project LIFE

[Ayris, 2008]. They are based on the same philosophy although presenting important variants following the processed objects. I will describe below only the generic model (see chapter 3.5 of the report for details).

The model appears in the form of three tabs: 1. A double entry table presenting the various costs relative to a series of formats of digital

objects (36) 2. A table of the constants of costs used in the 1st table

3. A table of the costs of migration according to the number of processed objects

The first table associates to each of the formats, according to the management model explained in [Ayris, 2008]:

• A complexity ratio (elaborated in the previous templates)

• Number of the sample objects (from the previous case studies)

• The number of objects planned for an annual coverage



• Number of presumed maintenance actions

• The cost of maintaining the technology (fixed)

• The development cost of tools (fixed)

• The cost of the economic planning of the conservation actions (variable)

• The cost of the conservation actions (variable)

• The cost of quality assurance transactions (variable)

The five costs are added on a base of 1, 5, 10 and 20 years.

3. Lessons

The analysis of the publications and the models listed above obviously show that there is really no consensus for a universal model although most of the projects aim at answering this requirement. This comes from the following factors:

1. Each of the models were generally established to answer a precise need, either in terms of document type to be processed, or in terms of strategy of conservation, or more generally in terms of the user institutions (library, archives, audiovisual collection, etc.)

2. The objectives of the models are different. Some are only case studies on actual cost, the others are projected models, others are comparative models. Finally certain models deal only with digitalization, which strictly speaking is not to be included in the problems of long-term conservation.

3. All note the lack of reliable source data about certain costs, in particular the costs linked to the human activities and those in connection with the costs of access, for which there is no model to date (this last question being nevertheless approached in [Sanett, 2003] and [Cost Calculator, 2005]).

4. The models do not systematically differentiate the structures of costs (software, material, manpower, etc.) and the cost variables (the factors susceptible to influence these costs over time). It is understandable as these factors are even at present fluctuating. This makes any long-term forecast (more than 10 years) very unpredictable.

5. The quasi-totality of the models exclude the proper archival part of the conservation in the description of costs (which we can translate in this context as the constitution of the metadata). It can be explain in two ways. Either we suppose that the creation of documents born-digital implies the almost automatic constitution of the metadata (besides knowing that it is not exact), or we presuppose that these costs are identical to those engendered by the description of analog documents and thus are not to be integrated into the models concerning digital documents.

6. The models attempt to formulate a simple model of costs if possible by means of a short formula, however this presentation is deceptive. The various tables* elaborated within the framework of the LIFE Project show that each of the elements (6) of the basic generic



formula declines in a multitude of specific formulas in worksheets.

A recent consensus however sets free the use of the OAIS model as a general frame of reflection for the modelling of the costs. It is on this base that I shall bring my conclusions.

The use of the OAIS mode as the frame for the management of the costs was also proposed within the framework of work of a Master's degree by [Mageto, 2009]. This suggests determining the cost variables attached to each of the sub-elements of the OAIS model. These elements were then subjected to a panel of active institutions in the domain (in Norway) to try to validate them. Considering the conditions of realization of this work (limited public - target, limited time of data collection) the results can only be indicative of the trends and do not allow the validation in a reliable way of this analysis, which remains to be strengthened. The study brings to light that few organizations are aware of this problem of the costs of long-term preservation. It also brings to light that the costs of staff for storage are underestimated with regard to the costs of the hardware and software.

4. The OAIS Model as a general frame of reflection

By generalizing the hypotheses presented in certain models, it seems that the general plan of the OAIS model allows a display and more precise characterization of the various models. Both figures below place the scope of the models on this basis. It shows the "detached" zones (e.g. the digitalization) and "border" zones (e.g. the access). It misses a deep dimension, which could be developed from more detailed plans of the functions of the OAIS model that would eventually allow it to take into account the dimension of the formats or those of the levels of description.

Figure 1: Area of coverage of the models proposed according to the OAIS (part 1-General model)



Figure 2: Area of coverage of the models proposed according to the OAIS (part 2-Format and storage)

Figure 3: Area of coverage of costs calculators proposed according to the OAIS

This vision allows to describe a frame of structured model of costs, presented below.



Figure 4: Elements of costs according to the OAIS model

For convenience of understanding, I added to the OAIS model the unrefined typology of documents in entrance (digitized or born-digital).

The costs of digitalization and production , once being made upstream are in my opinion to be excluded in a model of conservation. We can discuss to see if the costs of extraction (to produce the SIP) and the costs of conformity in correspondence of the entrance formats are to be included or not in the model. The costs of the design of the electronic records keeping system (ERKS) should be calculated separately and included in the model in the form of amortization.

The costs of description have to be the object of a future review. For me it is necessary to separate the metadata of the creation of the documents, which can / should eventually be retrieved by the system of archiving but which were actually created at the production stage of the documents and thus are not to be integrated into a model of long-term costs. On the other hand the data with a cleanly archival nature/description, as far as they condition the modalities of access to documents (and consequently the associated access costs ), should be the object of a cost calculation the variable of which would be the depth of the description, the hypothesis being that a finer description is necessary for documents to be diffused by self-service via the internet.

The costs of technology watch are difficult to estimate but must be included in the model because it covers the costs of specialized work and must be foreseen. It is also an element which asks to be deepened, as far as the sector linked to it « economic planning of the preservation » in the OAIS model is under developed. The costs of management which are of the same specialized nature but which concern the supervision and control give rise to the same



remarks.

The costs of storage , such as they are defined in the OAIS model include the strategies of conservation of the data (migration, emulation, etc.). The analysis of the literature shows that the calculation of the storage (strictly speaking hardware and software) and the costs of migration and\or emulation answer different calculation logics, which is the reason they are separately indicated on the figure. It is however evident that these costs are correlated.

Finally the costs of access or communication also have to be the object of a review as far as the communications strategies can engender different cost structures according to the adopted choices, as for example:

• Free accessibility of the data/documents warehouses via internet, which requires as a rule the conversion of big masses towards "consumer" formats but with little staff involvement

• Communication of the data/documents on demand, that requires a staff capable of supplying / transforming the objects with reasonable delay but with comparatively little real capital investment

5. Conclusions

The registration of the various theoretical or practical models in the general plan of the OAIS allows to compare what is comparable. It would be desirable that the next published studies are systematically situated in regard to this model.

As a rule the fact of segmenting the costs in this way allows an estimation or a rather precise calculation. It remains to build one general model which, beyond a simple sum of the costs of the various elements can integrate the influencing factors between the various cost elements (for example, if in the ingest phase there are costs for transformation to archivable formats, this would then minimize the downstream costs during a later migration).

Although more and more archive centers begin to preserve electronic archives, few of these publish analysis of costs. It would seem sensible that a program of CIA encourages the publication of such data to allow the development of reliable models. The more these models are validated by the international archival community, the more they can serve as a base of budgetary negotiation with the custodian bodies.



6. Bibliography

Costs Models

[Ashley, 1999] Digital Archives Costs: Facts and Fallacies Kevin Ashley DLM Forum 1999 http://web.archive.org/web/20070208034816/http://europa.eu.int/ISPO/dlm/fulltext/full_ashl_en.htm [Ashley, 2000] The costing of digital records management Kevin Ashley Records Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 3, December 2000 http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldAbstractOnlyArticle/Pdf/2810100302.pdf [Ayris, 2008] The LIFE 2 Final Project Report Paul Ayris, Richard Davies , Rory McLeod, R. Miao, Helen Shenton, Paul Wheatley LIFE Project, London, Août 2008 http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/11758/ [Bøgvad Kejser, 2009] Cost Model for Digital Curation: Cost of Digital Mi gration Ulla Bøgvad Kejser, Anders Bo Nielsen, Alex Thirifays iPRESS 2009, Sixth International Conference on Preservation of Digital Objects, San-Francisco, oct. 2009 http://www.cdlib.org/iPres/presentations/Kejser.pdf [Chapman, 2003] Counting the Costs of Digital Preservation: Is Repo sitory Storage Affordable? Stephen Chapman JoDI, Vol 4, No 2, May 2003 http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/article/view/jodi-113/99 [Davies, 2007] How much does it cost? The LIFE Project - Costing M odels for Digital Curation and Preservation Richard Davies, Paul Ayris, Rory McLeod, Helen Shenton, Paul Wheatley LIBER Quarterly, Volume 17 (2007), No. 3/4 http://liber.library.uu.nl/publish/issues/2007-3_4/index.html?000210 [DCC, 2005] DCC and DPC Joint Workshop on Digital Curation Cost Models 26 July 2005, British Library, London http://www.dcc.ac.uk/events/cm-2005/



[Digital Preservation Tesbed, 2005] Costs of Digital Preservation Digital Preservation Tesbed, 2005 http://www.digitaleduurzaamheid.nl/bibliotheek/docs/CoDPv1.pdf [Erpanet, 2003] Cost Orientation Tool ERPANET (Electronic Resource Preservation and Access Network). Septembre 2003. http://www.erpanet.org/guidance/docs/ERPANETCostingTool.pdf [Granger, 2000] Cost Elements of Digital Preservation , Steward Granger, Kelly Russell, et Ellis Weinberger. Version 4.0, october 2000. http://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20050111000000/http://www.leeds.ac.uk/cedars/colman/costElementsOfDP.doc [Griffin, 2002] Cost Estimation Tool Set for NASA’s Strategic Evolu tion of ESE Data Systems Vanessa GRIFFIN, Kathleen FONTAINE, Gregory HUNOLT, Arthur BOOTH, David TORREALBA, nov. 2002 http://sads.cnes.fr:8010/pvdst/DATA/5-8_griffin.pdf [Hendley, 1998] Comparison of Methods & Costs of Digital Preservati on Tony Hendley British Library Research and Innovation Report 106, 1998 http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/services/elib/papers/tavistock/hendley/hendley.html [Kingma, 2000] The Costs of Print, Fiche, and Digital Access The Early Canadiana Online ProjectBruce KingmaD-Lib Magazine, February 2000, Volume 6, Number 2 http://www.dlib.org/dlib/february00/kingma/02kingma.html [LIFE2, 2008] The LIFE2 Final Project Report http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/11758/1/11758.pdf [Moore, 2007] Disk and Tape Storage Cost Models Richard L. Moore, Jim D'Aoust, Robert McDonald, and David Minor, In: Archiving (2007) http://chronopolis.sdsc.edu/assets/docs/dt_cost.pdf Présentation powerpoint au Designing Storage Architectures Meeting, September 17-18, 2007 http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/news/events/other_meetings/storage07/docs/Moore_SDSC2007.ppt



[Oltmans, 2004] Cost Models in Digital Archiving: An overview of Li fe Cycle Management at the National Library of the Netherlands Erik Oltmans Library Quarterly, Vol 14(2004), No 3/4 http://liber.library.uu.nl/publish/articles/000103/article.pdf [Puglia, 1999] The Costs of Digital Imaging Projects Steven Puglia, National Archives and Records Administration RLG-Diginews, oct. 1999, vol 3, no 5 http://worldcat.org/arcviewer/1/OCC/2007/08/08/0000070511/viewer/file422.html#feature [Sanett, 2003] The Cost to Preserve Authentic Electronic Records i n Perpetuity: Comparing Costs across Costs Models and Cost Framew ork Shelby Sanett RLG DigiNews, August 15, 2003, vol. 7/, No 4 http://www.worldcat.org/arcviewer/1/OCC/2007/08/08/0000070511/viewer/file2132.html [Watson, 2005] The LIFE project research review - Mapping the land scape, riding a life cycle James Watson. November 2005. Final draft. (chap. 3: General life cycle costing, chap. 8: Digital preservation (costs)) http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/1856/1/review.pdf [Wheatley, 2007] LIFE: Costing the digital preservation lifecycle Paul Wheatley, Paul Ayris, Richard Davies, Rory McLeod, Helen Shenton iPRES Annual Conference 2007, 11-12 October 2007, Beijing, China http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/4914/1/4914.pdf Costs Calculators (chronological)

[Storage Costs, 2004] Storage Costs per object per year Erik Oltmans

http://www.dcc.ac.uk/docs/Costs_Archiving_Oltmans.xls [Cost Calculator, 2005] Preservation Project Cost Calculator Digital Curation Center (DCC): IT Innovation Centre, 2005. Freddy Choi and Matthew Addis

http://www.dcc.ac.uk/docs/Preservation_Project_Cost_Calculator_1.0.xls



[Costmodel, 2005] Digital Preservation Costmodel Digital Preservation Testbed

http://www.digitaleduurzaamheid.nl/bibliotheek/docs/Kostenmodel_in_Excel_versie_1.2_(final).xls [Kalkulation Tools, 2007 ?] Kalkulations-Tools Imaging & Media Lab (IML), Unibas

http://www.abmt.unibas.ch/dokumente/Kalkulations-Tool.xls [Life Model, 2008] LIFE2 Project Generic Preservation Model version 1.4 LIFE Project, London, UCL, 2008 http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/14128/ Other References

[OAIS, 2003] Reference Model for an Open Archival Information Sy stem (OAIS) Norme ISO 14721:2003 Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) http://www.iso.org/iso/fr/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=24683 et http://public.ccsds.org/publications/archive/650x0b1.pdf

[BRTF, 2010] Sustainable Economics for a Digital Planets: Ensuri ng Long-Term Access to Digital Information Final Report „Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access“ February 2010 http://brtf.sdsc.edu/biblio/BRTF_Final_Report.pdf [Eakin, 2008] A Selective Literature Review on Digital Preservati on Sustainability Lorraine Eakin, Amy Friedlander, Roger Schonfeld, with contributions by Sayeed Choudhury Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access, December 2008 http://brtf.sdsc.edu/biblio/Cost_Literature_Review.pdf [Mageto, 2009] Cost Factors in Digital Preservation Doreen Kerubo Mageto Master thesis International Master in Digital Library Learning http://www.longrec.com/Intranet/ResearchResults/RecommendedPractices/Cost%20Factors%20in%20Digital%20Preservation%20DOREEN%20MAGETO%20FINAL%20MASTER%20THESIS%202009.pdf

cost of digital archiving : is there an universal model...jean-daniel zeller cost of digital...

Documents