Propose a topic

Propose topics

DEADLINE: FRIDAY 29 APRIL

In addition to a 5 minute lightening talk we also require everybody to propose a topic. This does not necessarily mean that you are an expert or that you are willing to lead a discussion on this topic. Proposed topics could entail:

• topics you would like to discuss in more detail with the group - eg a problem (or a solution) you have encountered
• an aspect of your work that you would like to share with the group (please bring examples of workflow, documentation etc with you)
• a topic they would like to learn more about

After the deadline we will then turn this into a list and ask people to indicate their preferences/interests ahead of the event and use this to shape the discussions.

In each please explain your level of knowledge or experience and comment on the proposals. Please use the following format:

Short phrase summary of topic

Name, Affiliation

Paragraph-long statement describing topic

Proposals

SIP Creation and Rubymatica

Tom Laudeman, University of Virginia (AIMS Project)

I would like to demonstrate Rubymatica and discuss issues related to processing of files to make them suitable for a Submission Information Package (SIP). I am the author of Rubymatica. It is a Ruby port of the SIP creation phase of Archivematica. My efforts were supported by the AIMS team, especially the digital archivists. (Many thanks to the Archivematica people for blazing the trail.) A key question is: How much processing should we do before initial assessment? The demo is just a few minutes, but I hope the discussion will be lively.

Describing Electronic Records: What's Useful to the Researcher?

Mark Matienzo, Yale University (AIMS)

I'd like to discuss what people think is useful and practical information to incorporate about electronic records into archival description. A good example of this is extent - is extent in terms of data size (e.g. megabytes/gigabytes) sufficient and appropriate? Are file/directory counts useful to researchers, or are they potentially misleading? I'd also be curious how people are approaching description of records like websites as well - whether they're describing sections of a site's information architecture, and what other information would be crucial to provide in a access system for archival description.

Accessioning, Processing, Delivering, and Preserving Emails

Peter Chan, Stanford University (AIMS)

I would like to know what tools people use to accession, process, deliver and preserve emails. I am also curious to know what do accessioning, processing, delivering and preserving mean to different institutions. I saw emails being printed on paper, described in finding aids and delivered in a reading room. I also found emails presented in visually simulating graphs. I hope to share the tools I found useful and to discuss how far archivists should do on emails.

How informed are our depositors?

Simon Wilson, Hull University (AIMS)

I would like to discuss the topic of how informed are depositors are (or are not) about born-digital archives and the critical difference regarding their expectations and assumptions relating to the preservation and access of born-digital material compared to traditional paper archives. What do they expect of us?  How can we ensure that their expectations are reasonable?  

Collaboration and Institutions?

Gretchen Gueguen, University of Virginia (AIMS)

I would like to talk about how institutions can effectively collaborate in the creation/management of born-digital archives. Each institution has it's own quirks and local practices, but to be really effective we need to figure out how to share the burden. In a larger sense we could also discuss what such collaboration would really mean, just sharing information? infrastructure? development of tools? Collaborations take effort, so what would make them worthwhile?