1. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.1 Introduction to Archives and Geospatial Issues ( Continued ) Steve Morris Head, Digital Library Initiatives North Carolina State University Libraries

2. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.2 Archiving: More on the Problem Shift to web services-based consumption –Data more ephemeral –… but can web services be put to use in archiving? (U.S.) County and municipal data immediately at risk –Last month’s data is often gone (overwrite as practice) Archiving vs. “Permanent access” –Permanent access requires that the data is discoverable, accessible, understandable, and usable Preservation metadata –Standard geospatial metadata plus additional administrative and technical metadata (one function of content packaging) Lots of overlap with the temporal geospatial problem and the business continuity/disaster preparedness problem

3. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.3 Why Preserve Data? Sept. 2006 survey of North Carolina county and municipal GIS agencies: local business rules or uses driving temporal snapshotting* –Information technology policy (20%) –Records retention policy (18%) –Tax administration rules (25%) –Land use change analysis (11%) –Resolution of legal issues (18%) –Historic mapping (56%) –Other (30%) 65% of responding local agencies are currently snapshotting vector data * Numbers not final, analysis of survey results not yet complete

4. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.4 Archiving: Points of Intersection w/OGC? GML for archiving? –Work from Simple Features Profile? (PDF/A equivalent) Content packaging –e.g. METS, MPEG 21 DIDL, XFDU, IMS-CP Routinized content exchange or replication –A smart “rsync-like” function? Temporal versioning –Vector data as serial entities (implications for metadata?) Persistent identifiers –Persistent, durable references via resolution services Rights management (GeoDRM) –Archival packaging and introducing archival use cases Nov. ‘05 OGC TC talk: http://edina.ac.uk/projects/grade/Long-term_preservation.ppt

5. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.5 Engaging Spatial Data Infrastructure Archiving indirectly benefits from addressing business problems that are more compelling than archiving (disaster preparedness, business continuity, federal/state data improvement) –Content packaging and content exchange –Rights management for distributed content –Metadata production, outreach & training (archive feedback) –Content standards (helps w/ semantic issues in archiving) –Utilize existing social networks History of geospatial industry cross-fertilization with library technologies –Metadata, metasearch, metadata harvesting –PDF/A learning experience applicable to archival GML?

6. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.6

7. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.7 Current Status of Archiving Geospatial Data ( Continued ) Steve Morris Head, Digital Library Initiatives North Carolina State University Libraries

8. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.8 Some Ongoing/Recent Geoarchiving Projects Geospatial Electronic Records (CIESIN, NHPRC) Geospatial Repository for Academic Deposit and Extraction (EDINA, JISC) Maine GeoArchives (State of Maine, NHPRC) North Carolina Geospatial Data Archiving Project (NCSU NCCGIA, Library of Congress) National Geospatial Data Archive (UC Santa Barbara, Stanford, Library of Congress) Persistent Archive Testbed (UCSD Supercomputer Center, NARA, more …) VanMap (UCSD Supercomputer Center, InterPARES) … lots of other activity at the UCSD, Carleton Univ., etc.

9. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.9 North Carolina Geospatial Data Archiving Project (NCGDAP) Partnership between university library (NCSU) and state GIS agency (NCCGIA), with Library of Congress under the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP), one of 8 initial NDIIPP partnerships Focus on state and local geospatial content in North Carolina (state demonstration) Tied to NC OneMap initiative, which provides for seamless access to data, metadata, and inventories Objective: engage existing state/federal geospatial data infrastructures in preservation Learning through data wrangling Serve as catalyst for discussion within the geospatial community

10. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.10 Key Archiving Issues Archival formats for vector data –NCGDAP: Capture data as is, with some format conversions, wrap additional technical/administrative metadata with data –‘Open’ does not imply permanent access (unfortunate transformations, absence of persistent vendor support?) –Need to study lifecycle of GML profiles and application schemas (persistence across GML versions, official adoption, vendor support, persistent access to schemas) Preservation metadata –FGDC example: No easy means to wrap archival administrative or technical metadata around producer metadata –No easy means to manage information at the level of the persistent serial object –Content packaging, PREMIS as solutions?

11. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.11 Content Packaging (or Wrappers) Why needed? –Wrap additional administrative or technical metadata around the object (this is not just an archiving problem) –Bundle data object components (multiple files, ancillary data, metadata files, documentation, licenses, project files, etc.) –Explicitly tie rights information to object –Facilitate automated inspection of rights, object components Some relevant standards –Metadata Encoding and Transfer Standard (METS), from the digital library community –IMS-CP, from the learning technologies community –XFDU (XML Formatted Data Unit), from the space sciences –MPEG 21 Digital Item Declaration Language (DIDL), from the multimedia community but more broadly applied (referenced in OWS GeoDRM thread )

12. OGC ® © 2006 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.12 Example: METS as a Wrapper METS Sections –Descriptive metadata – multiple instances of metadata may be embedded or pointed to as separate files –Administrative metadata – how files created and stored, IPR, provenance/lineage (embedded or pointed to) –File Groups – different groups for different versions of the object –Structural Map – hierarchical structure for object –Behavior – associate executable behaviors (services) Some possible metadata to fold in –FGDC (U.S. example), PREMIS, METS Rights Expression Language (or other REL), Dublin Core, MODS, MIX, many more METS Profiles –As with other XML technologies, it is necessary to constrain the encoding or content in order to support applications