I think "significantProperties" should remain with the object - it can
be pretty subjective and closely related to the object. I would favour
option 5 with the addition of the wrapper semantic unit of
"preservationPolicy", as Tobias suggests.
There is, however, a group of semantic units which I would like to see
presented as an entity: environment. We are working on using PREMIS for
preserving personal digital archives of notable individuals. Oftentimes
we can record details of the environment(s) used by the creator in the
production of their archive (because we have access to their computers);
we would love to be able to create this information once and link to it
from the objects derived from that environment, rather than add the same
information to each object. Did the editorial committee discuss this as
a possibility at any stage?
Gerard Clifton wrote:
> Thanks for raising this, Tobias.
> In coming up with the current options, the Editorial Committee did discuss
> whether to create a separate entity for policies or business rules, which
> would include preservationLevel and significantProperties, but initially
> decided that a simple option could be to keep these semantic units as
> 'attributes' of individual objects, rather than link to a separate entity.
> However, we are also interested to hear others' views on this.
> Also, what other kinds of semantic units might fit under 'policy'?
> Gerard Clifton
> Digital Preservation
> National Library of Australia, Canberra ACT 2600 Australia
> t: +61 2 6262 1381 e: [log in to unmask]
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 16:55:10 +0100, Steinke, Tobias <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Although I like the structured solution of option 5, there should be a
>> semantic unit "preservationPolicy" for this. The preservation level and
>> the significant properties are heavily related to the policy of the
>> archiving institution (the agent) and to the associated rights.
>> Therefore "preservationPolicy" or shorter "Policy" (it's all about
>> preservation...) could even be an own type of entity in PREMIS. Maybe we
>> should consider to think about other policy-related issues before making
>> a decision.
>> Best regards,
>> Tobias Steinke
>> Tobias Steinke
>> Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
>> Adickesallee 1
>> D-60322 Frankfurt am Main
>> Telefon: +49-69-1525-1762
>> Telefax: +49-69-1525-1799
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: PREMIS Implementors Group Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>>> Behalf Of Ruth Duerr
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:14 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: [PIG] Revision of the PREMIS Data Dictionary -
>>> call for comments: significantProperties and preservationLevel
>>> Of the options presented on the wiki, I think Option 5 would
>>> suit the
>>> needs of the scientific data archive best....
>>> On Jan 22, 2007, at 12:37 AM, Gerard Clifton wrote:
>>>> The PREMIS Editorial Committee has begun revision of the PREMIS Data
>>>> Dictionary for Preservation Metadata and its related XML schemas
>>>> and is
>>>> seeking feedback from the digital preservation community.
>>>> Comments and discussion are invited on proposed changes to the
>>>> units 'significantProperties' and 'preservationLevel'. Notes on a
>>>> number of
>>>> issues and suggested options for these semantic units are
>>>> on the
>>>> PREMIS Implementors' Group wiki at:
>>>> Please send comments and suggestions to the PIG-list for further
>>>> The initial period for comment will end on Friday, February 2, 2007.
>>>> The full list of proposed changes will soon be made available via
>>>> the wiki
>>>> (see PREMIS Revisions at: http://pigpen.lib.uchicago.edu:8888/
>>>> Other topics for discussion will follow in due course.
>>>> With thanks,
>>>> The PREMIS Editorial Committee
Paradigm & Cairo
Oxford University Library Services
Osney One Building
OXFORD OX2 0EW
Web : http://www.paradigm.ac.uk
Telephone : +44 (0) 1865 283821