Advertisement

Archival Science

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 165–184 | Cite as

EAD ODD: a solution for project-specific EAD schemes

  • Laurent Romary
  • Charles Riondet
Original Paper
  • 196 Downloads

Abstract

This article tackles the issue of integrating heterogeneous archival sources in one single data repository, namely the EHRI portal, whose aim is to support Holocaust research by providing online access to information about dispersed sources relating to the Holocaust (http://portal.ehri-project.eu). In this case, the problem at hand is to combine data coming from a network of archives in order to create an interoperable data space which can be used to search for, retrieve and disseminate content in the context of archival-based research. The central aspect of the work described in this paper is the assessment of the role of the Encoded Archival Description (EAD) standard as the basis for achieving the tasks described above. We have worked out how we could develop a real strategy of defining specific customization of EAD that could be used at various stages of the process of integrating heterogeneous sources. We have developed a methodology based on a specification and customization method inspired from the extensive experience of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) community. In the TEI framework, one has the possibility to model specific subsets or extensions of the TEI guidelines while maintaining both the technical (XML schemas) and editorial (documentation) content within a single framework. This work has led us quite far in anticipating that the method we have developed may be of a wider interest within similar environments, but also, as we believe, for the future maintenance of the EAD standard.

Keywords

Encoded Archival Description EAD Text Encoding Initiative TEI Standard specification Research infrastructures Customization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Annelies van Nispen (NIOD) and Hector Martinez Alonso (ALMAnaCH) for their help, and to Lou Burnard (TEI) for his wise comments.

Funding

Funding was provided by Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (Grant No. 654164).

References

  1. Aas K, Sugimoto G, Jagodzinski S, Tamm U, Jeller D and Lux Z (2013) Archives Portal Europe network of excellence. D6.1 First analysis report: applying web 2.0 solutions in archival applications. http://apex-project.eu/images/docs/D61_Web20_In_Archival_Applications.pdf. Accessed 9 Jan 2018
  2. Aas K, Jagodzinski S, Lux Z, Djupdahl M, Sugimoto G, Papp S and Kaljuvee A (2014) Archives Portal Europe network of excellence. D6.6 Second analysis report: applying Web 2.0 solutions in archival applications, 2014. http://apex-project.eu/images/docs/D66_Web20_In_Archival_Applications_final.pdf. Accessed 9 Jan 2018
  3. AFNOR. EAD and EAC-CPF Working Groups (n.d.) Proposals for evolution of EAD. https://www2.archivists.org/sites/all/files/France_Proposals%20for%20evolution%20of%20EAD_0.rtf. Accessed 9 Jan 2018
  4. Archives Portal Europe. https://www.archivesportaleurope.net/. Accessed 14 April 2018
  5. Archives Portal Europe Network of Excellence (APEx) (2015) Encoded archival description (EAD). http://apex-project.eu/index.php/en/outcomes/standards/apeead. Accessed 04 April 2018
  6. Bunn J (2013) Developing descriptive standards: a renewed call to action. Arch Rec 34(2):235–247.  https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2013.830066 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. CENDARI (n.d.) Collaborative European Digital Archival Research Infrastructure. http://www.cendari.eu. Accessed 4 April 2018
  8. CLARIN—European Research Infrastructure for Language Resources and Technology. https://www.clarin.eu. Accessed 14 April 2018
  9. DARIAH-EU. https://www.dariah.eu. Accessed 14 April 2018
  10. EHRI (2014) An initial Schematron schema for any EAD to validate for EHRI-preprocess. Version: 0.1. https://cdn.rawgit.com/EHRI/data-validations/master/schematron/rules.html. Accessed 14 April 2018
  11. European Holocaust Research Infrastructure. http://portal.ehri-project.eu. Accessed 14 April 2018
  12. Gartner R (2015) An XML schema for enhancing the semantic interoperability of archival description. Arch Sci 15(3):295–313.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-014-9225-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. International Council on Archives (2000) ISAD (G): general international standard archival description: adopted by the Committee on Descriptive Standards, Stockholm, Sweden, 19-22 September 1999, 2nd edn. https://www.ica.org/sites/default/files/CBPS_2000_Guidelines_ISAD%28G%29_Second-edition_EN.pdf. Accessed 04 April 2018
  14. International Council on Archives (2004) ISAAR (CPF): international standard archival authority record for corporate bodies, persons and families. Adopted Canberra, Australia, 27-30 October 2003, 2nd edn. https://www.ica.org/sites/default/files/CBPS_Guidelines_ISAAR_Second-edition_EN.pdf. Accessed 04 April 2018
  15. International Council on Archives (2007) ISDF: international standard for describing functions. Developed by the Committee on Best Practices and Standards, Dresden, Germany, 2–4 May, 2007. https://www.ica.org/sites/default/files/CBPS_2007_Guidelines_ISDF_First-edition_EN.pdf. Accessed 4 April 2018
  16. International Council on Archives (2008) ISDIAH: international standard for describing institutions with archival holdings. Developed by the Committee on Best Practices and Standards, London, UK, 10–11 March, 2018. https://www.ica.org/sites/default/files/CBPS_2008_Guidelines_ISDIAH_First-edition_EN.pdf. Accessed 4 April 2018
  17. International Council on Archives. Experts group on archival description (2016) Records in contexts, a conceptual model for archival description. Consultation draft v0.1. Conseil international des Archives, September 2016. http://www.ica.org/sites/default/files/RiC-CM-0.1.pdf. Accessed 9 Jan 2018
  18. ISO 8601:2004 (2004) Data elements and interchange formats—Information interchange—Representation of dates and times. International Organization for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  19. ISO/IEC 19757-3: 2016 (2016) Information technology—Document Schema Definition Languages (DSDL)—part 3: rule-based validation—Schematron. International Organization for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  20. Library of Congress (2002) Encoded Archival Description tag library. EAD technical document no. 2. http://www.loc.gov/ead/tglib/index.html Accessed 12 April 2018
  21. Library of Congress (2008) EAD 2002 RELAX NG Schema (version 200804 release) Society of American Archivists and Library of Congress. http://www.loc.gov/ead/ead.rng. Accessed 12 April 2018
  22. Library of Congress (2013) Development of the Encoded Archival Description DTD. http://www.loc.gov/ead/eaddev.html Accessed 9 Jan 2018
  23. Library of Congress (2017) EAD: official site. http://www.loc.gov/ead/index.html. Accessed 14 April 2018
  24. Lieske C, Rahtz S, Sasaki F (2006) Internationalization and localization of XML: introducing “ITS”, XTech 2006, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, May 2006. https://www.w3.org/People/fsasaki/docs/xtech06-sasakietal.pdf. Accessed 15 April 2018
  25. Medves M, Romary L (2014) EAG(CENDARI): customising EAG for research purposes. Building infrastructures for archives in a digital world, Jun 2013, Dublin, Ireland. https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00959841v2. Accessed 9 Jan 2018
  26. METS: metadata encoding and transmission standard. http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/. Accessed 4 April 2018
  27. PARTHENOS: pooling activities, resources and tools, for heritage E-research, networking, optimization and synergies. http://www.parthenos-project.eu. Accessed 14 April 2018
  28. Rahtz S, Burnard L (2014) Advanced topics in ODD, In: ODD: one document does it all. Workshop at the Text Encoding Initiative Conference and Members Meeting, 22–24 Oct Evanston, IL. https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01767683. Accessed 15 April 2018
  29. Riondet C, Romary L, Van Nispen A, Rodriguez KJ, Bryant M (2017) Report on standards. [Contract] D.11.4, Inria Paris. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01503235/. Accessed 2 April 2018
  30. Romary L, Riondet C (2017) Ongoing maintenance and customization of archival standards using ODD (EAC-CPF revision proposal). EAC-CPF revision proposal. https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01677185. Accessed 2 April 2018
  31. Romary L, Banski P, Bowers J, Degl’innocenti E, Ďurčo M, et al (2017) Report on standardization (draft). [Technical report] Deliverable 4.2 Inria. https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01560563. Accessed 2 April 2018
  32. Schematron (2018). http://schematron.com. Accessed 2 Nov 2016
  33. Schematron QuickFix (2017). http://www.schematron-quickfix.com. Accessed 28 March 2017
  34. Shaw EJ (2001) Rethinking balancing flexibility and interoperability. New Rev Inf Netw 7(1):17–31.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13614570109516972 Google Scholar
  35. Society of American Archivists. Technical Subcommittee on Encoded Archival Context for Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families (TS-EAC-CPF) (2010) https://www2.archivists.org/governance/handbook/section7/groups/Standards/TS-EAC-CPF. Accessed 4 April 2018
  36. Society of American Archivists. Technical Subcommittee on Encoded Archival Description (TS-EAD) (2010) https://www2.archivists.org/governance/handbook/section7/groups/Standards/TS-EAD. Accessed 4 April 2018
  37. Text Encoding Initiative (2013) Getting started with P5 ODDs. http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/Customization/odds.xml. Accessed 12 April 2018
  38. Text Encoding Initiative (2018a) P5: guidelines for electronic text encoding and interchange. <schemaSpec>. Version 3.3.0. Revision f4d8439. http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-schemaSpec.html. Accessed 14 April 2018
  39. Text Encoding Initiative (2018b) P5: guidelines for electronic text encoding and interchange. <classSpec>. Version 3.3.0. Revision f4d8439. http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-classSpec.html. Accessed 14 April 2018
  40. Walsh N (2002) Literate programming in XML. http://nwalsh.com/docs/articles/xml2002/lp/paper.html. Accessed 9 Jan 2018

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Inria (team ALMAnaCH)ParisFrance
  2. 2.DARIAH-EUBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations