Talk:4.2.1.3 Representation Information

Should software be part of the digital object?

Software, necessary for enabling information within a digital object to be interacted with by a user, is often considered Representation Information. Without such software the object cannot exist as information to be interacted with. Furthermore, any change in the software may/will change the information that is made available for interaction by the user. Therefore the OAIS model should enable and require such software to be considered part of the digital object itself. In cases where the software is truely just providing additional meaning then it should still be considered Representation Information

Euanc (talk) 14:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm very much in favour of recognising the importance of software in digital preservation (and for preserving software to enable data preservation for that matter), but I'm not sure I understand the motivation for this proposal. What benefit does this change bring, and why is it a problem currently?

In OAIS there is some flexibility as to what RI is captured, so that RI capture is based upon need (the whole designated community thing, ensuring RI is enables a particular audience to use some data in the OAIS). So leaving software in the RI camp would ensure that this flexibility is there. Otherwise aren't we heading to a situation where every object in OAIS requires software to be provided? Why not the OS as well? Would this not be overly prescriptive, and potentially a waste of precious resources?

PRWheatley (talk) 12:23, 18 November 2015 (UTC)