 |
 |
Exactly....I brought up LOCKSS in my first reply, ONLY to use the "lots of copies" line. Not suggesting that it's a backup solution. Other than lots of copies is a backup solution. See how straightforward that is? *sigh* I like the media-in-pelican-cases solution. Jason On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Mark Jordan <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi Kyle, > > ----- "Kyle Banerjee" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > LOCKSS is good for protecting articles since that is what it is > > designed to do. For a variety of reasons that go beyond cost, I think > > it's a hopeless model for backup. > > > > Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting that LOCKSS is for backup, in its PLN > form it's part of a more general collaborative preservation program that > includes policies, business continuity plans, etc. It was never intended to > be a backup tool. You're right about journal articles being central to its > original design, but PLNs are simply another use for the platform; for > example, content on a PLN is not restricted to public-facing versions, it > can be packaged up for long-term preservation. > > Mark > -- Follow me on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/griffey