LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PIG Archives


PIG Archives

PIG Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PIG Home

PIG Home

PIG  October 2006

PIG October 2006

Subject:

Re: Upcoming revision of the PREMIS Data Dictionary - call for participation

From:

brandt <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

PREMIS Implementors Group Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:16:49 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (83 lines)

Hi Georg,

you wrote:
However, this looks more like a workaround to me, as I understand a file
cannot contain other files. Is this understanding correct? Or am I
missing the actual point here?

A file can contain other files. If they can be
"transformed into standalone files without adding any additional
information, although a transformation process such as decompression,
decryption, or
decoding may have to be performed on the bitstream in the extraction
process. Examples of these
bitstreams include a TIFF within a tar file, or an encoded EPS within an
XML file.
In the PREMIS data model these bitstreams are defined as “filestreams,”
that is, true files
embedded within larger files. Filestreams have all of the properties of
files, while bitstreams do
not. In the Data Dictionary, the column for “File” applies to both files
and filestreams. The
column for “Bitstream” applies to the subset of bitstreams that are not
filestreams and that adhere
to the stricter PREMIS definition of bitstream. The location
(contentLocation in the Data
Dictionary) of a file would normally be a location in storage; while the
location of a filestream or
bitstream would normally be the starting offset within the embedding
file." (p. 1-3, Data Dictionary )

If this is not interpreted as a compression (like mentioned in the onion
model) filestreams can be described as files. And their relationships
should in my opion be described - as you mentioned  - through the
semantic unit relationship on the representation level.
But that is no real answer to your question. The crucial point is now,
if I understand you correct, where and how to embed this information.
The easiest way to embed the metadata in a structured form is in the
SIP/zip file. That is how it is handled in the kopal project. One would
not have any problems pointing to files in that case.

With the possibility to point into files (like METS fptr, see:
http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/docs/mets.v1-5.html#fptr) one can keep
Metadata on the outside of the SIP/zip. That could also be done with the
definiton of a (bit more flat) structure in an own XML-schema to
identify different sections of spearated PREMIS XML data.

Another possibility might be the solution brought up by Youn. But I do
not know how to model that at this point in time.
That solution might even lead to problems, because it is open how
relationships might correlate. If you have an undefined (or even cyclic)
hierachy of relationships (e.g. some structural and derivative
relationships), how would one express the relations between these
relationships (and their meaning)? This is not yet defined in the PREMIS
Data Dictionary but may then become relevant for exchange of
information. My impression is that PREMIS is thougt in a bit more flat
and easier way, related to this relationship issue. But maybe I am wrong.

I  hope I touched the right issue.

Olaf

Georg Buechler schrieb:
> We've just been discussing a similar question, so thank you Youn for bringing this up!
>
> We decided to use PREMIS to record metadata in a digital preservation project with state archives in Switzerland. I should point out that this is really a very basic, pilot project, and that we are not using METS, which may be the cause of some of the problems we encountered. Namely, we are archiving data from a database-driven application. We plan to combine several plain-text data files, information about the data model, and other files into a zip-file. So we have a representation (the AIP in the current form) consisting of one file (the zip-file) which itself consists a couple of other files - there clearly is a hierarchy of files that is difficult to model in PREMIS. Example 3 in the PREMIS Data Dictionary (p. 3-34 sqq.) gives a hint of how to achieve this, namely through the use of the "relationship" semantic unit. However, this looks more like a workaround to me, as I understand a file cannot contain other files. Is this understanding correct? Or am I missing the actual point here?
>
> Thanks for any kind of clarification.
>
> Best,
> Georg
>
>   

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------
Goettingen State and University Library
Olaf Brandt
Project kopal 
Tel.: +49-551-39-7805
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://www.sub.uni-goettingen.de/
http://kopal.langzeitarchivierung.de/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
March 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
May 2022
April 2022
January 2022
December 2021
October 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
April 2021
March 2021
January 2021
December 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
April 2020
February 2020
December 2019
November 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager