Differing Ideas of Digital Preservation

Photo by Cristina Zaragoza on Unsplash

As a developing field, what digital preservation means can be different depending on the type of organization. Consider the data created in different disciplines such as the various sciences and humanities.  What do these disciplines expect to preserve?

Consider a personal field of interest and the data produced.  Briefly discuss the data that needs to be preserved.  (Examples of fields of interest: art, photography, geology, chemistry, history, sociology, genealogy, dance,  language, literature --- choose what interests you!)

Before starting UNT, I was a research assistant in a psychology laboratory. One of the projects we were working on was called Selfies for Science. The goal of the project was to help human facial recognition by creating an ethnic, diverse database. Participants would sign a waiver, answer a questionnaire, come into the lab, scan their student ID, and then we would take headshots of them in various lighting, poses, and facial expressions. We’d take video of them moving their head from left to right and walking down a hallway. Finally, we’d ask them to submit two selfies (without a filter) that were taken at least six months apart.  

In this situation, each participant had 96 items (e.g., photos, video) that corresponded to them but that had to be anonymized. Data we had to save included the person’s name, randomized participant number, all 96 items, student ID, and signed waivers. Metadata we had to be sure was also included was the distance the camera was set away from the participant (e.g., close, medium, far); the facial expressions of the participant (e.g., happy, sad, scared, angry, neutral); the lighting condition (e.g., bright, neutral, dark); facial pose (e.g., front, profile, slightly turned). In addition to the metadata of the photos, we also need to save the participant features data (e.g., hair color, length, distinguishing marks). There are probably other data I’m forgetting now.  

In this case, as much information as possible is expected to be preserved because the lead researcher is interested in sharing the data with other researchers. Though the Selfies for Science project was aimed at creating a more diverse, ethnic facial database, other projects that can be done with the data are numerous. In order to make research easier for others, (meta)data is preserved so that those who use to use or download the data can use the items for their research accordingly.  

Issues in Digitization

What do you think are some burning and even unresolved issues in digitization in digital libraries?

There are a few important issues regarding digitization. Some of the more urgent issues concern (1) who is in charge of ensuring digital content is archived and that the archived information is (2) complete, (3) correct, and (4) usable.

One of the biggest issues in digitization as explained by Lynch (2017) is the fact that when it comes to online content, many do not know who, or which types of organizations, should be archiving and/or digitizing it. In Lynch’s talk, he focuses on born-digital news information, however, the issues extend further and yet have similar difficulties. Whether born-digital or digitizing, the work needed to archive can be expensive and hard to calculate. Each organization has different needs, different materials, different methods, and different budgets - each of these must be taken into account. The Consortium of European Social Science Data Archives created a toolkit in 2017 to help organizations pitch the need for archiving costs. The toolkit itself has 13 different components that help illustrate how complicated an issue archiving is when it comes to organizations understanding the important need for it.

In Lynch’s (2017) talk about born-digital news, he also touched on the issue of archiving data that are complete. Especially when it comes to born-digital content, the ease of inserting hyperlinks or embedding videos may mean that articles are no longer valid or giving complete information when a user visits the site. Ensuring that information is correct and complete will continue to be a challenge as websites change.

Digital content must be correct and that is a constant struggle as technology changes, as what is deemed relevant changes, and depends on budgets of organizations. Metadata plays an important role in how digital content is searched and how users interact with it. As we continue to archive digital content, it’s important that metadata is taken into effect. Chen (2001) argues “increasing quantities of metadata associated with preserved digital records” (p. 4) will be important in ensuring that content is searchable, correct, and current.

Lastly, digital content must be usable. As Neal (2015) stated, “quality equals content plus functionality” (p. 4). As new advances in technology happen, we can expect more content than ever to be accessible to more people, worldwide. However, digital content is still not fully functional for those with disabilities. Technology has helped bridge many gaps but as Epp (2006) points out when it comes to those who are visually-impaired, information accessibility still has a way to go. Scanning a book, article, or other print material and putting it online fulfills the requirement for digitization but when it comes to those who are visually-impaired, the material may still be unavailable.

References

Chen, S. S. (2001). The paradox of digital preservation. Computer, 34(3), 24-28.

Cost-Benefit Advocacy Toolkit. (2017). Consortium of European Social Science Data Archives.

Epp, M. A. (2006). Closing the 95 percent gap: Library resource sharing for people with print disabilities. Library Trends, 54(3). 411-429.

Lynch, C. (2017). Born-digital news preservation in perspectives. Preservation, Digital Technology & Culture, 46(3), 94-98. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/pdtc-2017-0012

Neal, J. S. (2015). Preserving the born-digital record: Many more questions than answers. American Libraries, June 2015, 30-33.