The devil is in the details: Describing born-digital records using the Rules for Archival Description

Kat TimmsLibrary and Archives Canada

SAA Archives 2013 New Orleans

Overview

Part I- Introduction to RAD- General issues with RAD- Issues with RAD Ch. 9 for Electronic RecordsPart II- Beyond RAD – metadata/descriptive standards

landscape- What do we need? What do we have? Who

needs which information for what purpose?

Rules for Archival Description: Introduction

• Original edition published 1990• AACR2/ISBD + archival principles (respect des fonds,

multi-level description moving from general to specific, focus on context)

• ISAD(G) & ISAAR(CPF) vs. RAD• CUSTARD = DACS; RAD2 (2008)• Principles: provide access via descriptions; promote

understanding of archives; establish grounds for presuming authenticity

Rules for Archival Description: General Issues

• Richard Dancy, “RAD Past, Present, and Future,” Archivaria #74 (2012)

• Bibliographic model that has moved on• ISBD/AACR2-based organization: missing or

packed & buried data• Content standard? Data value standard?• Describing intellectual entities, physical

entities, or both?

A Peek at Physical Description

• 9.5B1: 6 photographs (tiff)• 9.5B2 (optional): 5 GB of photographs• 9.5B3 (optional): 2 CD-ROMs (textual records)• 9.5B5 (when applicable): 2.4 MB of textual records

and other material• 9.5C1: 1 TB of cartographic material : col.• 9.5C2: 1 computer disk : sd., col., single sided, single

density, soft sectored• 9.5D1: 1 computer disk ; 9 x 9 cm

What’s all the fuss about? Looking at a Born-Digital Item

Digital Reality = The Item

• On opposite ends from MPLP? Nesmith’s broader contextual descriptions?

• Existence and visibility of minute details (bit streams, file formats, metadata, structure, content & context) = necessity to manage all of these aspects/components of “recordness”

• Good start: devising a conceptual model for archival records, including items (digital or otherwise)

Rules for Archival Description: Chapter 9 - Records in Electronic Form• Practical reality: instructions specific to digital

records are needed• Highlighting three issues in Chapter 9

i. Which date of creation is *the* date of creation?ii. Documenting “conservation” activities for

9.8B10b file format migration and digitization via RAD vs. via ANSI/NISO Z39.87 or PREMIS

iii. Fonds/collection – series – file – item: where’s the rest of the arrangement structure?

What do we need?

• Clearer instructions for intellectual management (metadata for discovery) and physical management (metadata supporting curation over time)

• A conceptual model for archives, including at the item-level

• Build upon and re-use existing standards (e.g., PREMIS, EAD)

• Clearer interpretation and understanding of digital records and their structure

• Building an infrastructure based on the continuum model

What’s out there?

Future RAD, considering “Who needs to know what?”

• Conceptual Model for Archives --> Framework of Standards --> Guidelines & Best Practices

• Outstanding theoretical questions for digital records• Information needs of clients: Content, Context (how

much?) and Curation (how much transparency?)• Standards serve both inward facing needs (archival

physical and intellectual management) and outward facing needs (resource discovery and access)

Final Thoughts

• We’re moving in the right direction…• RAD has a future, but it’ll be different…• Let’s keep on deconstructing digital archives

coming to a better common understanding…

Thank you!