Talk:1.5 ROAD MAP FOR DEVELOPMENT OF RELATED STANDARDS
Other work in this area which came out of the OAIS review wiki discussions includes:
The proposal from Nancy McGovern for a ‘Family of Standards’: http://wiki.dpconline.org/index.php?title=The_Family_of_OAIS_Standards_proposal
The proposal from Eld Zierau on references to PREMIS http://wiki.dpconline.org/index.php?title=PREMIS_and_OAIS
As my own thoughts didn’t align completely with these perspectives and as the remit for the review was so narrow I decided not to add them to the wiki at the time. But as the discussion has come up within NESTOR and the CoreTrustSeal Board (successor to the WDS and DSA certification boards) I’ve added them to the wiki now in case they’re of help.
HL’H The following is an edit of the text I shared with the group who created this wiki as HLH-OAIS-2017reviewDraftText
Comments relate to this section and to http://wiki.dpconline.org/index.php?title=ANNEX_B_RELATIONSHIP_WITH_OTHER_STANDARDS_OR_EFFORTS_(INFORMATIVE)
The announcement of the current OAIS review states:
“Nor will the standard be changed from a reference model to an implementation design. Archive implementation standards or implementation profiles or detailed archival process standards or protocols should be addressed but they would become separate standards and would be developed through separate CCSDS projects.”
But I have no sense of how this might interact with the OAIS, how OAIS might constrain the development of such standards or how they in turn might be expected to influence the OAIS. This is already an issue as the existence of PAIMAS is presented as a strong argument for an OAIS ‘pre-ingest’ function (http://wiki.dpconline.org/index.php?title=Pre-ingest) but that would seem to fall beyond the scope of the current review.
Rather than mapping out a journey to a future network of associated standards the section includes the same headings as were included in the 2002 OAIS (then empty) with no explanation for the selection of these headings. I’m not clear on the difference between "– standard(s) for the submission (ingest) methodology used by an Archive: " which includes PAIMAS and PAIS (recommended standard https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/651x1b1.pdf ) and "standard(s) for the submission (ingest) of digital data sources to the Archive". Could these be explained?
The various CCSDS/ISO standards (EAST, DEDSL, XFDU) and PREMIS don’t clearly sit under the heading “standard(s) for the submission of digital metadata, about digital or physical data sources, to the Archive” as they may incorporate information generated post-submission.
The only “standard(s) for recommended archival practices” seems to be about records management (ISO15489 and 23081) with no explanation or guidance on their application alongside OAIS (the same applies to references to ISO15489 in ISO16363)
Overall the Roadmap does not seem to sit easily alongside ANNEX B RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER STANDARDS OR EFFORTS (INFORMATIVE) (B-1)
Annex B is divided into two parts:
1. Prior work that has been incorporated with some amendments (Z39.5 and the IEEEE mass storage model)
2. Standards which align with OAIS though may be more detailed in some areas or which implement and extend some OAIS concepts, mostly the CCSDS standards mentioned in the roadmap
Of all the standards mentioned the reader is unlikely to get a sense of the level of value they might deliver or their level of adoption or currency.
Could the road map and the Annex be usefully merged or restructured and made more informative?
Some brief explanation of the criteria for acceptance into the Roadmap or Annex might be valuable. Do they need to be CCSDS/ISO approved? Do they need to have reached a critical mass of adoption? How does one apply for inclusion?
ANNEX B RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER STANDARDS OR EFFORTS (INFORMATIVE) (B-1) also includes a
“brief mapping between some terminology used in various domains and that used in the OAIS reference model”,
So brief in fact that it includes 4 words: Archives, Accession, Record and Primary Audience and doesn’t seem to fit in with the rest of the material in the Annex. Would this be better placed with the definitions?