On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 10:10:40AM -0400, Jacob Ratliff wrote:
> Hi Ned,
>
> The biggest case for SP is boiled down to 2 things in my mind.
> 1) its terrible at preservation. If you are just using it as a digital
> asset mgmt system its fine, but if you need the preservation component go
> with something else.
I've never used Sharepoint, but really it boils down to coming up with a
list of requirements for a digital preservation storage system:
- It must have an audit log of who did what to what when
- It must do fixity checking of digital assets
- At minimum, it must tell you when a fixity check fails
- It really should be able to recover from fixity check
failures when an object is read
- Ideally it should discover these *before* an object is
accessed, recover, and notify someone
- It must support rich enough metadata for your objects
- It must meet your preservation needs (N copies distributed over
X distance within Y hours)
- It must be scalable to handle anticipated future growth.
I'm sure there are more, I haven't had much coffee yet this morning so
I'm missing some. And honestly, you have to scale your requirements to
what your specific needs are.
*Only* then can you evaluate solutions. If you've got a list of
requirements, you can then ask "I need this. How well does SP (or any
other possible solution) meet this need?"
--
Thomas L. Kula <[log in to unmask]>
Senior Systems Engineeer, Unix Systems Group
Library Information Technology Office
Columbia University in the City of New York
