This presentation describes the 3 Policy Levels in SCAPE and the relation between them in order to create a consistent policy framework. The work in the SCAPE project will result in a Catalogue of Policy Elements.
2. “Without a policy framework a digital library is little
more than a container for content”
(DL.Org : Digital Library Technology and Methodology Cookbook)
2
Why policies?
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
3. 3
Policies in practice
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
Parse-Insight survey 2010NDSA Web Archiving Survey 2012
4. 4
Policies in practice
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
Canadian Heritage Information Network, 2011
http://bit.ly/16HS7Cj
5. Analysis policies found on the Web M.Sheldon (LoC)
• Libraries
• Archives
• Museums
Nothing compared to all organizations that preserve
digital collections!
5
Policies in practice
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
6. But you are working daily with policies!
• Making decisions for a preservation system
• Acquiring content for preservation
• Developing ingest workflows
• Plan preservation activities
• Training staff
• Planning budgets
• Answering to surveys
• Etc.
6
Policies in practice
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
7. • Consistency
• Transparency
• Accountability
• Knowledge exchange
• Interoperability
7
Why (documented) policies?
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
8. • SCAPE is about:
• Scalability: many & complex
• Large scale activities cannot be done manually
• (automated) Quality Assurance
• Development of “policy driven preservation actions”
• Requires detailed, machine readable policies
• Consistent with (a combination of) higher level policies
• Two target areas:
• Preservation Watch (SCOUT)
• Preservation Planning (PLATO)
• Goal: creation Catalogue of Policy Elements
8
Policies in SCAPE
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
9. 9
Policy work in SCAPE
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
PRESERVATION PROCEDURE
POLICY
PRESERVATION PROCEDURE
POLICY
(Machine Readable)
GUIDANCE POLICYGUIDANCE POLICY
CONTROL POLICY
Humanreadable
Overview of main topics
(Top management))
Catalogue of policy
elements
(Middle Management)
Model, controlled
vocabulary
(DP specialists)
10. 10
Guidance policies
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
11. •Describes the approach to achieve the goals
•Human readable
•Generic but more detailed
•Should be leading for Control Policies
•On Department Level
11
Preservation Procedure Policies (PPP)
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
PRESERVATION
PROCEDURE POLICY
PRESERVATION
PROCEDURE POLICY
Control PolicyControl Policy
GUIDANCE POLICYGUIDANCE POLICY
12. 12
Catalogue of policy elements
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
13. Related to “preservation case”
•A collection
•An audience (“Designated Community”)
•A preservation activity
• Defined by Objectives with measurable attributes
• Objectives related to Guidance Policies
• Example: identification, migration
•Use of controlled vocabularies (RDF, OWL and SKOS)
•Development of supporting tool to create CP’s
•See http://www.scape-project.eu/
13
Control Policies
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
PRESERVATION
PROCEDURE POLICY
PRESERVATION
PROCEDURE POLICY
Control PolicyControl Policy
GUIDANCE POLICYGUIDANCE POLICY
14. 14
The control policy model
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
15. • Based on 2 existing policies (SB and STFC)
• Based on step-by-step process
• Identify Content Set, Identify User Community
• Map relevant policy statements to Guidance level
• (Later: Using the Catalogue of Policy Elements)
• Identify Preservation Case & Objectives
• Generate Control statements
• Review Preservation Case
• Next step: validating with external policy
15
Practical exercise: creating Control Policies
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
PRESERVATION
PROCEDURE POLICY
PRESERVATION
PROCEDURE POLICY
Control PolicyControl Policy
GUIDANCE POLICYGUIDANCE POLICY
16. Findings:
• Human readable CP intermediate version needed
• Measurable objectives/attributes not easy to phrase
• Worthwhile to make implicit information more explicit
• Used policies were too generic
• Input from other documents needed
• “Lessons learnt” input for Catalogue of Policy Elements
16
Practical exercise: creating Control Policies
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
17. • Building a Catalogue of Policy Elements
• 3 related levels of SCAPE Preservation Policies
• Lead to a consistent architecture of policies
• Catalogue will support creation of Control Policies
• Interoperable via standards like RDF,OWL
• Will facilitate machine readable/actionable
preservation activities
17
To summarize
This work was partially supported by the SCAPE Project.
The SCAPE project is co‐funded by the European Union under FP7 ICT‐2009.4.1 (Grant Agreement number 270137).
Editor's Notes
(national libraries ± 200), aantal archieven mij niet bekend, aantal musea, daarnaast data centers, institutional repositories etc…
We wrok with them, but often they are not explicitly
Consistency in organizational approach Avoiding risk of ad hoc decisions without relation to organizational goals Organisational interoperability± DL .org organisational, semantic and technical± ways of exchanging information Quality Control Making them public will foster transparency Accountability to stakeholders Knowledge exchange within the DP community Interoperability of policies (=>reason)
3 levels, each leading to different deliverables Comparable with strategic, tactic and operational
10 areas not susprising, several guidelines to determine what should be in a policy: (Policy Framework of Nancy McGovern, Neil Beagrie, TDR) Nakijken met policy framework Guidance policies Human readable Generic Distilled from various sources and real life examples Examples: “ preserve digital collections for long term” “ Work with standards and best practices”
Template gemaakt Illustrates the policies with examples and explanations, some might sound obvious, sometimes less Audience intended are organisations that will work on policies And make use of monitoring or planning functionality
Vocabularies based on earlier experience in PLANETS project with PLATO Planning tool & Exercise with SB Denmark Objective (SMART) Measure Describes characteristics of items, formats or actions Value Modality Qualifier
Catherine: • Having explicit policy in natural language is important (ensures consistency and common understanding between colleagues and ensures that knowledge is passed on when there are staff changes) • Expressing policy in machine testable ways is more complex but can bring benefit through use of tools. For example: implicit information understood by an human audience will need explicitly expressing for computers and this is a tricky process. Also understanding what the key factors you wish to test to ensure that the condition is met is also complicated to ascertain. • Natural language preservation procedure policy defines acceptable states in statements but control level defines measurable attributes in questions - this also adds to the complexity of the translation. • Written policy is at a fairly abstract level and practicalities may be addressed in implementation plan/job procedure document or one-off project plan, so you may to look in other places for the information required.
Catherine: • Having explicit policy in natural language is important (ensures consistency and common understanding between colleagues and ensures that knowledge is passed on when there are staff changes) • Expressing policy in machine testable ways is more complex but can bring benefit through use of tools. For example: implicit information understood by an human audience will need explicitly expressing for computers and this is a tricky process. Also understanding what the key factors you wish to test to ensure that the condition is met is also complicated to ascertain. • Natural language preservation procedure policy defines acceptable states in statements but control level defines measurable attributes in questions - this also adds to the complexity of the translation. • Written policy is at a fairly abstract level and practicalities may be addressed in implementation plan/job procedure document or one-off project plan, so you may to look in other places for the information required. You cannot go directly from PPP to CP: human readable version of CP needed for common understanding and consistency
