1. Digital Repository Preservation Service ________________________ Digital Dissemination Task Force April 24, 2008 Meg Bellinger, AUL Roy Lechich, Audrey Novak, ILTS

2. Yale Cyber Infrastructure Architecture Common Services Persistent identification, Authentication & Authorization, Registries, Rights Management Content Provision: Services & Storage For digital collections, preservation, metadata From library, museums, research, academic and administrative departments Users Yale and global Fusion: Services, Tools, Applications Brokers, aggregators, indexes, catalogs, MetaLib, XSearch Infrastructure Framework, Protocols, Standards Web services, Z39.50, OAI-PMH, RSS, SRU/SRW, OAIS, Fedora Presentation: Interfaces Yale uPortal, Classesv2, Google, Personal Information Environment, Discipline specific, gallery, museum and library sites Based on a graphic created by Lorcan Dempsey

3. Preservation Archive E-Publishing (Institutional Repository) Collections Environment Integration Services Content Sources Dissem- ination Full Text Books Audio & Video Images and Metadata Complex Objects Research Data Finding Aids Personal Collections Google, MSN, Yahoo … Image Commons University Portal Library, MetaLib Collections XSearch VITAL Classes*v2 (Sakai). Interface out Yale University Library Digital Repository Service Content Metadata

4. Outline ______________________________________ 24 Apr 2008 Introduction Background Digital Preservation Repository –Phase I –Additional Phases Within the Larger Landscape

5. 24 Apr 2008 “ Digital preservation is the whole of the activities and processes involved in the physical and intellectual protection and technical stabilization of digital resources through time in order to reproduce authentic copies of these resources.” (YUL Digital Preservation Policy) (YUL Digital Preservation Policy) Intro: What is Digital Preservation? __________________________________________________

6. 24 Apr 2008 Introduction: The Need ___________________________________________________________________ At an ever accelerating pace, faculty, students, and staff (e.g., the Library) are creating, sharing, and storing digital information for teaching, learning, research, administrative, and creative purposes. Mass Digitization Information in digital form is now integral to Yale's core mission. Statistical Datasets Images Scientific & Biomedical Data Audio, Video, Podcasts Web Sites

7. 24 Apr 2008 Introduction: The Need __________________________________________________ Digital resources are fragile and the preservation of these resources is complex. Digital preservation is dynamic –Responses to technological obsolescence or media decay must be taken quickly. Digital preservation is pro-active –Rather than reactionary and the prospects for successfully preserving digital resources rest heavily upon decisions taken at each stage of their life cycle starting with creation.

8. 24 Apr 2008 Digital Landscapes Committee, Cyberinfrastructure Survey (Oct 2006) Cyberinfrastructure Survey Ranking from 19 survey questions posed to faculty: #1 Easier electronic access to scholarly materials #2 Providing students with digital access to research and instructional materials #11 Ensuring the preservation of my scholarly digital output (e.g., datasets, research notes, e-prints) Introduction: The Need _____________________________________________________

9. 24 Apr 2008 Introduction: The Need _____________________________________________________ “ The coolest thing that will be done with your data someone else will do.” Open Repositories 08 Open Repositories 08

10. Background – YUL Related Initiatives _____________________________________________________ 24 Apr 2008 IAC Rescue Repository –2004 - present IAC Digital Preservation Committee –Nov 2004 - Jan 2007 IAC Metadata Committee –Nov 2004 - Feb 2007 –PREMIS - Preservation Metadata Task ForcePREMIS - Preservation Metadata Task Force April - Oct 2006

11. 24 Apr 2008 “An increasing number of projects in the YUL are generating or acquiring digital content …” “The digital masters for much of this material are in immediate danger of permanent loss through media decay, physical damage, technological obsolescence, or difficulties in archival management..." "...in the interim, we propose a flexible and agile/quick short-term solution…" Rescue Repository Rescue Repository (May 2004 Requirements Report) ______________________________________May 2004 Requirements Report

12. 24 Apr 2008 Managed, secure storage (disk-to-disk-to- tape). Resources are organized according to owning library, collection, subcollection(s), file name. Activity is managed by simple ingest and retrieval applications with basic file verification and validation. A ~3 year temporary solution (May 2005 +3 yrs). Heavily used … Rescue Repository Description Rescue Repository Description _____________________________________________________

13. 24 Apr 2008 Users: BRBL, Div, E-Collections, Geo, LWL, MSS/A, Peabody, Preservation, SSL, VRC, YUAG

14. 24 Apr 2008 Preservation Policy – Defines digital preservation; establishes general principles about what is preserved; promulgates our commitment to standards.Preservation Policy Best Practices – A dynamic suite of documents that address current best practices for preservation-related issues such as format validation, registries, etc.Best Practices Digital Preservation Committee Digital Preservation Committee ___________________________________________________________________

15. 24 Apr 2008 Metadata Committee Metadata Committee ____________________________________________ Preservation Metadata Taskforce (PREMIS) Report PREMIS ( PREservation Metadata Implementation Strategies) defines the metadata needed to preserve digital information assets for the long term.PREMIS

16. Digital Preservation Need and Related Initiatives Summary _____________________________________________________ The demand for a Digital Preservation Repository from faculty, Rescue Repository users, digitization operations and projects is heavy. The Rescue Repository and work by the IAC Digital Preservation and Metadata/PREMIS Committees laid the foundation. Rescue Repository is reaching its planned end to life. 24 Apr 2008

17. Digital Preservation Repository: Phase I _________________________________________________________ 24 Apr 2008 $500,000 funding from the Provost to establish a Digital Preservation Repository prototype. –Provide mechanisms and services for preservation and access to the data. –Create the scalable hardware infrastructure. –Demonstrate an extensible repository service model. –Develop the resource (staff and economic) models. –Establish the collaborative campus partnerships. –Further the research and scholarship into digital preservation issues.

18. Digital Preservation Repository: Phase I _________________________________________________________ 24 Apr 2008 Working from two Use Cases: 1.YPED (Yale Protein Expression Database)* Protein profiling mass spectrometry data sets generated by the Keck Lab 2.Images from the Rescue Repository Approximately 400,000 individual image files from the Art Gallery, Beinecke, Divinity Library, Lewis Walpole Library, Library Visual Resources Collection, and Manuscripts and Archives department. *Proteomics is the large-scale study of proteins and is often considered the next step in the study of biological systems, after genomics.

19. Digital Preservation Repository: Phase I _________________________________________________________ 24 Apr 2008 1.Hardware Architecture 2.Software Design 3.Preservation Metadata 4.Use Case: YPED 5.Use Case: Images

20. Phase I - Hardware ______________________________________ 24 Apr 2008 20TB YPED and Images 30TB Microsoft mass digitization 10TB non-images (Rescue Repository) 40TB Annual growth with Library digitization projects _________ 250TB Annual growth with Fortunoff video digitization project 1000TBs (a petabyte) within 5 years Others?

21. Phase I - Hardware ______________________________________ 24 Apr 2008

22. Yale Cyber Infrastructure Architecture Common Services Persistent identification, Authentication & Authorization, Registries, Rights Management Content Provision: Services & Storage For digital collections, preservation, metadata From library, museums, research, academic and administrative departments Users Yale and global Fusion: Services, Tools, Applications Brokers, aggregators, indexes, catalogs, MetaLib, XSearch Infrastructure Framework, Protocols, Standards Web services, OAI-PMH, OAIS, Fedora, METS, MVC, SOA Presentation: Interfaces Yale uPortal, Classesv2, Google, Personal Information Environment, Discipline specific, gallery, museum and library sites Based on a graphic created by Lorcan Dempsey

23. Software Design ___________________________________________________ 24 Apr 2008 Phase I - Core Preservation Functionality Deposit, Normalization, Packaging, Validation, Ingest, Storage (multiple copies, geographic separation), Preservation Policy Management, Authorization, OAI-PMH, SRW/SRU, Retrieval YPED and Image Use Case Requirements Additional Phases - More Services Preservation actions All (or almost all) user-facing services Enhanced access & delivery through applications

24. Repository SIPAIPDIP Deposit / IngestPreservation / StorageAccess  Flexible  Accept Different Types of Data  Collect Data and Metadata Components  Normalize for Ingest Processing  Verify Integrity  Add Identifiers  Add Preservation Metadata  Continuous Integrity Checks  Format Migrations (e.g..tiff to.jp2000)  Storage Migrations (to new or different type physical media)  Logging  Reporting  Authorization  Validation  OAI-PMH  SRW/SRU  Indexing  Retrieval  Logging

25. Build: Hardware environment Core preservation repository services Project specific service components needed for YPED and to replace Rescue Repository Migration of Rescue Repository image content 24 Apr 2008 Digital Preservation Repository – Phase I Summary _____________________________________________________

26. 24 Apr 2008 Additional Phases _____________________________________________________ Examples: Full Rescue Repository migration More content (project/use cases) –Project specific ingest and access More storage (950TBs) Preservation actions (integrity checks, format migrations, etc.) Reporting Rights Management 5 years, 6FTE, ~7 million dollars

27. Peer Institutions: Stanford, Harvard Rutgers DAITSS (Florida) Michigan Columbia Internationally: European National Libraries Australia & New Zealand 24 Apr 2008 Larger Landscape ____________________________________________

28. Thank you Q&A 24 Apr 2008