I think I have made the point blurred in details - sorry about that. I think
the mistake is that I became too detailed in my suggested changes of the
rationale of the preservationLevelType. So my suggestion is simply to
simplify the '1.3.1 preservationLevelType' Rationale to the below. The full
new suggestion is attached in a Word document.
In my opinion the point is that there are just as many interpretation of
preservation levels as there are institutions. This is why the values should
not have a vocabulary on its own.
I agree with you that distance, technique and frequency of integrity is some
of the basic elements that must be considered for preservation levels of
type that concerns the “Bit preservation level”. However, I know a lot of
other elements that influences bit preservation (e.g. encryption) and I do
not think there is common interpretation of what these elements mean to the
preservation level. Furthermore, I am sure that such elements will change
over time for a given implementation of ensuring a specific preservation
level. I tried to indicate this in the '[...] in 2013 technology [...]'
sentence. An example is that there may be other solutions in 5-10 years -
for example if DNA technology can be utilized in a practical way in year
That means that using this new technology may change a setup for a specific
preservation level. For the Royal library of Denmark, this means that we
only want to have preserved metadata that expressed as fixed levels as e.g.
low, medium and high, - while the actual implementation of specific
placement of copies of data (OS, Hardware type, organization, physical
location, clearance of personal ...) is defined in policies and strategies
that may change over time.
As said, the examples of values do not belong to the '1.3.1
preservationLevelType' Rationale, and as suggested these should be taken out
- the examples of values are actually already given in '1.3.2
Best Regards, Eld
'1.3.1 preservationLevelType' Rationale
The preservation level value needs to describe the subset of preservation
functionality that the preservationLevelValue is defining. For example a
preservation level type of “Bit preservation level” might for example have
values of ‘Low’, ‘Medium’ or ‘High’. Similarly, a preservation level type
of “logical/functional preservation level” might have values ‘Emulation’,
Digital Preservation Specialist, PhD
The Royal Library
P.O. Box 2149, 1016 København K, Denmark
tel +4533474690 | [log in to unmask] | www.kb.dk