Using Metadata to Facilitate Understanding and Certification of Assertions about the Preservation Properties of a Preservation System

  • Jewel H. Ward
  • Hao Xu
  • Mike C. Conway
  • Terrell G. Russell
  • Antoine de Torcy
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 390)


Developers of preservation repositories need to provide internal audit mechanisms to verify their assertions about how the recommendations outlined in the Open Archival Information System (OAIS) Reference Model are applied. They must also verify the consistent application of preservation policies to both the digital objects and the preservation system itself. We developed a method for mapping between the OAIS Reference Model Functional Model to a data grid implementation, which facilitates such tasks. We have done a preliminary gap analysis to determine the current state of computer task-oriented functions and procedures in support of preservation, and constructed a method for abstracting state transition systems from preservation policies. Our approach facilitates certifying properties of a preservation repository and bridges the gap between computer code and abstract preservation repository standards such as the OAIS Reference Model.


preservation repository OAIS Reference Model trusted digital repository state transition system metadata policy rule-oriented programming 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    CCSDS. Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS) (CCSDS 650.0-M-2). Magenta Book. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Washington, DC (June 2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ISO/IEC 14721, Space data and information transfer systems – Open archival information system – Reference model (2003),
  3. 3.
    Conway, M.C., Ward, J.H., de Torcy, A., Xu, H., Rajasekar, A., Moore, R.W.: Policy-based Preservation Environments: Policy Composition and Enforcement in iRODS. Paper at the Society of American Archivists (SAA) 4th Annual Research Forum, Washington, D.C, August 12 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nicholson, D., Dobreva, M.: Beyond OAIS: towards a reliable and consistent digital preservation implementation framework. Paper at the 16th International Conference on Digital Signal Processing, DSP 2009, July 5-7, Santorini, Greece (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Waters, D., Garrett, J.: Preserving Digital Information.  Report of the Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information. CLIR, Washington, DC (May 1996)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    CCSDS. Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of candidate trustworthy digital repositories recommended practice (CCSDS 652.1-M-1). Magenta Book. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Washington, DC (November 2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Research Libraries Group. Trusted digital repositories: attributes and responsibilities an RLG-OCLC report. Research Libraries Group, Mountain View, CA (2002), (retrieved July 13, 2013)
  8. 8.
    Moore, R.: Towards a Theory of Digital Preservation. International Journal of Digital Curation 3(1), 63–75 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    ISO/IEC 17021, Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems (2011), (retrieved December 30, 2011)
  10. 10.
    Greenberg, J.: A quantitative categorical analysis of metadata elements in image-applicable metadata schemas. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 52(11), 917–924 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    NISO. Understanding Metadata. NISO Press, Bethesda (2001), (retrieved July 13, 2013)
  12. 12.
    DCMI, Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (DCMES), Version 1.1 (2013), (retrieved July 17, 2013)
  13. 13.
    Library of Congress, MARC 21 XML Schema (2012), (retrieved July 13, 2013)
  14. 14.
    Solove, D.J.: “I’ve got nothing to hide” and other misunderstandings of privacy. San Diego Law Review 44, 745–772 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Policy [Def. 1]. Oxford English Dictionary (2013), (retrieved July 15, 2013 )
  16. 16.
    ISO/IEC 16363, Space data and information transfer systems – Audit and certification of trustworthy digital repositories (2012),
  17. 17.
    CCSDS. Audit and certification of trustworthy digital repositories recommended practice (CCSDS 652.0-M-1). Magenta Book. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Washington, DC (September 2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moore, R., Smith, M.: Automated Validation of Trusted Digital Repository Assessment Criteria. Journal of Digital Information 8(2) (2007), (retrieved March 2, 2010)
  19. 19.
    Research Libraries Group. An audit checklist for the certification of trusted digital repositories, draft for public comment. Research Libraries Group, Mountain View, CA (2005), (retrieved August 20, 2013)
  20. 20.
    Marks, S.: Document Checklist. Trusted Digital Repository Documents (2012), (retrieved August 20, 2013)
  21. 21.
    Rosenthal, D.S.H., Robertson, T., Lipkis, T., Reich, V., Morabito, S.: Requirements for digital preservation systems a bottom-up approach. D-Lib Magazine 11(11) (2005), (retrieved August 20, 2013)
  22. 22.
    Berman, F., Fox, G.C., Hey, A.J.G.: Grid Computing. Wiley, West Sussex (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ward, J.H., Wan, M., Schroeder, W., Rajasekar, A., de Torcy, A., Russell, T., Xu, H., Moore, R.W.: The integrated rule-oriented data system (iRODS) micro-service workbook. Data Intensive Cyberinfrastructure Foundation, La Jolla (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rajasekar, A., Moore, R., Wan, M., Schroeder, W.: Policy-based Distributed Data Management Systems. Journal of Digital Information 11(1) (2010),
  25. 25.
    Hedges, M., Blanke, T., Hasan, A.: Rule-based curation and preservation of data: a data grid approach using iRODS. Future Generation Computer Systems 25, 446–452 (2009), CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fedora and the Preservation of University Records Project, 2.1 Ingest Guide, Version 1.0 (tufts:central:dca:UA069:UA069.004.001.00006). Tufts University, Digital Collections and Archives, Tufts Digital Library (2006),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jewel H. Ward
    • 1
  • Hao Xu
    • 2
  • Mike C. Conway
    • 2
  • Terrell G. Russell
    • 3
  • Antoine de Torcy
    • 3
  1. 1.The University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Data Intensive Cyber Environments Center (DICE)Chapel HillUSA
  3. 3.Renaissance Computing Institute (RENCI)Chapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations