 |
 |
There is a standard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Archival_Information_System Which leads to software like fedora commons. There is also archive.org. For a low annual subscription you can have fine-grained control over regular harvests of your web spaces (including password protected web spaces) These two roads diverge in a yellow wood... cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Andrew Weidner <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi Code4Lib, > > We are in the process of designing new workflows for preservation and > access of our digital stuff, and I'd like to get a sense of how people > understand digital objects in the preservation space. > > My gut tells me that it might be useful for future digital > archivists/archaeologists to have an object's descriptive metadata closely > associated with the object's files in the same directory in a human > readable plain text format. So that one directory would contain all of the > object's files and descriptive metadata in an easy to read package. > > Alternatively, descriptive metadata for many objects could be stored in a > single external file, say at the root of a preservation accession > directory, according to a recognized standard like METS. That requires more > work to reconstruct an object, and the linkage between an object's files > and descriptive metadata is looser, but it seems more efficient. > > How do others approach this problem? Are there recognized best practices to > adhere to? > > Thanks, > > Andy Weidner >