1. UPDATE ON PARTNER VISITS January 18, 2013 1/18/2013APTrust Update1

2. Conversations with partners 1/18/2013APTrust Update2 PartnerVisit dateParticipantsDean UNC11/15/1210Sarah Michalak Duke11/16/124Deborah Jakubs NCState11/16/125Susan Nutter Columbia11/29/124Jim Neal Syracuse11/30/1213Suzanne Thorin Notre Dame12/14/1213Diane Walker Emory12/19/124Rich Mendola Hopkins1/10/137Winston Tabb Maryland1/11/1316Pat Steele Stanford1/17/132Mike Keller Michigan??Paul Courant UVa??Karin Wittenborg

3. 1/18/2013APTrust Update3

4. 1/18/2013APTrust Update4 APTRUST Future Proposed Services DPN Replicating Node Aggregate Repository

5. 1/18/2013APTrust Update5 AGGREGATE REPOSITORY Partner priorities TDR (or equivalent) status Scalability Ability to deposit all types of content; especially video, audio, data, metadata Rights management – levels TBD Reasonable cost, i.e. for retrieving content Flexibility with regard to technologies

6. 1/18/2013 APTrust Update 6 DPN REPLICATING NODE What we heard: When will we hear more about DPN development? What differentiates APTrust from DPN? Will DPN nodes specialize in different types of content? Is APTrust the only node allowing direct deposit? Will charges for DPN be able to be combined with charges for APTrust?

7. 1/18/2013APTrust Update7 Feedback re: PROPOSED SERVICES Preservation services more important than access services to most partners “Universities are about access & production, we need APTrust to take care of preservation.” Group (and charge for) services by preservation level: storage (DPN), archiving (AggRepo) preservation (APTrust services) curation (probably IRs) Interest in: Format migration alerts and possible migration service Lead common standards development Common definitions of preservation levels Joint API development

8. Business concerns How many preservation efforts will my library need to support? What services will generate the most sustainable business model? How to develop cost based on level of service as well as amount of content? 1/18/2013APTrust Update8

9. Potential Use Cases Alerts for range of preservation activities: human audits, format migration Temporary storage for uncurated digital content Retrieval of multiple collections for data mining (rights dependent) Light up content for disaster recovery API (and potentially standards) development for use of specialized content 1/18/2013APTrust Update9

10. Key takeaways Keep focus on preservation – universities & publishers focusing on access and production. Collaborative community model (flexible cohesion) highly valued, both for technology development and knowledge sharing. Partners grateful for outreach and dialogue. Partners very anxious to find ways to stay engaged and actively contribute. 1/18/2013APTrust Update10

11. What’s Ahead Partner conversations about priority of future services APTrust Advisory Group mtg (3/7) at UVa Article in Journal of Library Administration (spring 2013) ARL full-partner meeting (4/29) at UNC ARL presentation to library deans (5/1-2) at ARL spring meeting in Chapel Hill 1/18/2013APTrust Update11