Bountouri, L, Paptheodorou, C., Soulikias, V., & Stratis, M. (2009). Metadata interoperability in public sector information. Journal of Information Science, 35(2), 204-231.
Note: Over recent years, there has been a worldwide growing need for interoperability among the systems that manage and reuse public sector information. This paper explores the documentation needs for public sector information and focuses on metadata interoperability issues. The research work studies a variety of public sector information metadata standards and guidelines internationally accepted and presents two methodologies to obtain interoperability. The first develops an application profile, while the second is based on the semantic integration approach and results in the creation of an ontology. The outcomes of the two approaches are compared under the prism of their scope and usage in terms of interoperability during the metadata integration process.
Chaudron, G. (2008). The potential of "function" as an archival descriptor. Journal of Archival Organization, 6(4), 269-287.
Note: Functional analysis has been incorporated widely into appraisal methods for decades. These methods, from documentation strategy to macroappraisal, are discussed, and the usefulness and limitations of functional analysis in appraisal are examined. Yet, while archival thinkers have focused on function in appraisal, little has been written on function in description, although it appears in the profession's standards. The influence of records management is evident in the description of institutional records using functional analysis, which are an increasing part of archival responsibility. Caution is needed, however, before we try to apply function as the principal descriptor to all our archival records.
MacColl, J. (2008). Research libraries and the power of the co-operative. Ariadne, 55.
Note: RLG Programs became part of OCLC in the summer of 2006. In November of last year, RLG Programs announced the appointment of a European Director, John MacColl. This article explains the rationale behind the combination of RLG with the OCLC Office of Research, and describes the work programme of the new Programs and Research Group. It argues for co-operation as the necessary response to the challenges presented to research libraries as the Web changes the way researchers work, and it lays out a new programme dedicated to research outputs, which will have significant European Partner involvement.
Nimer, C., & Daines, J. G. (2008). What do you mean it doesn't make sense? Redesigning finding aids from the user's perspective. Journal of Archival Organization, 6(4), 216-232.
Note: Archivists have begun to rethink the way that they present finding aids to patrons online. They are utilizing user studies to gain a better understanding of what information patrons expect to find and are investigating how to utilize Web 2.0 technologies to better meet patron needs. This article examines how the L. Tom Perry Special Collections is rethinking their finding aids presentation and their planned use of Web 2.0 technologies on their new finding aids Web site. It highlights the process for designing the new Web site and the usefulness of user studies to archivists.
Rush, M, Holdzkom, L., Backman, P., Santamaria, D.A., Leigh, A. (2008). Applying DACS to finding aids: Case studies from three diverse repositories. American Archivist, 71(1), 210-227.
Note: Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS) is the first descriptive standard in the United States to apply to all forms of archival description, including finding aids. This article contains three cases studies from diverse repositories of the implementation of DACS as a content standard for finding aids. They show the flexibility of DACS and its usefulness in standardizing descriptive practices while respecting different descriptive traditions.
Shaw, R. & Larson, R. R. (2008). Event representation in temporal and geographic context. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5173, 41-418.
Note: Linking digital resources that refer to the same people or places is becoming common. Events are another kind of entity that might be used to link resources in this way. We examine a number of standards for encoding of archival, historical, genealogical, and news information to compare the tools they offer for representing events.
Sibille, Claire (2008), EAD and EAC in French Archives: a status report. EAD at 10: a symposium celebrating the 10th anniversary of Encoded archival Description, San Francisco, August 2008.
Burrows, T. (2007). Identity parade: Building web portals about people. OCLC Systems & Services, 23(4), 329-331.
Note: The purpose of this paper is to look at the current state of initiatives to develop â€œpeople-centredâ€ portals by repurposing name authority data from union catalogues and similar sources.
Cunningham, A. (2007). Harnessing the power of provenance in archival description: An Australian perspective of the development of the Second Edition of ISAAR (CPF). Journal of Archival Organization, 5(1/2), 15-31.
Note: The publication in 2004 of the second edition of the International Standard Archival Authority Record (Corporate Bodies, Persons, Families) (ISAAR(CPF)2) signified a growing awareness within the archival profession of the need to standardise the documentation of the context of records creation, a need that extends well beyond the traditional requirements of bibliographic systems for authority control. This article examines, from an Australian perspective, the journey taken by the International Council on Archives Committee on Descriptive Standards in reviewing and revising the 1996 edition of ISAAR(CPF). It places this journey in the context of a generation of Australian innovations associated with the structured documentation of context and provenance, and reflects on possible future directions in relation to standardising the documentation of functions to form a trinity of descriptive entities: records, agents and functions.
Weimer, L. D. (2007). Pathways to provenance: DACS and creator descriptions. Journal of Archival Organization, 5(1/2), 33-48.
Note: Describing Archives: A Content Standard breaks important ground for American archivists in its distinction between creator descriptions and archival material descriptions. Implementations of creator descriptions, many using Encoded Archival Context (EAC), are found internationally. DACS's optional approach of describing creators in authority records separate from, but linked to, descriptions of holdings has the potential for the "rediscovery" of provenance in U.S. repository collections. Multiple provenance (e.g., the Australian series system), postmodern theory of archives, and an increased emphasis on provenance as function are some of the reconceptualizations of archival context that compliance with DACS may inspire.
Brown, J. F. (2006). More than just a name: Archival authority, control, creator description, and the development of Encoded Archival Context (EAC). THESIS: Chapel Hill
Note: Encoded Archival Context (EAC) is an XML-based encoding standard for describing creators of archival records, museum items, or bibliographic units. Based closely on ISAAR(CPF), the International Council on Archives standard for archival authority records, EAC allows archival repositories to create authority records that manage the various forms of names associated with a person, corporate body, or family, much like traditional bibliographic authority records do. However, EAC also allows for the inclusion of detailed and structured descriptive information about the entity being described. Furthermore, EAC records can be linked to descriptions of archival collections, bibliographic entities, and museum items related to the entity being described. Through interviews conducted with practicing archivists involved in the initial creation of EAC, as well as with North Carolina-area archivists involved in a pilot project to implement EAC on a state-wide basis, this study focuses on how EAC will change the way archivists perform authority work and creator description, how it will affect the user experience at archives, and how it may be implemented across repositories, libraries, and museums.
Fernandes, R. M. (2006). XML and electronic records: Main standards in the archival description. Ciencia da Informacao, 35(3), 45-53.
Note: The book describes the main standards XML in the archival description concomitantly with the definition and presentation of the tools of XML and concepts of the archival field.
Hockey, S. (2006). The rendering of humanities information in a digital context: Current trends and future developments. Aslib Proceedings, 58(1/2), 89-101.
Note: The purpose of this paper is to consider how digital resources might best be created and how the digital medium might best be exploited to serve the needs of research and teaching in the humanities.
Leigh, A. (2006). Context! Context! Context! Describing moving images at the collection level. The Moving Image, 6(1), 33-65.
Note: First paragraph of intro: Branding resources as collections is not new; librarians and archivists have all considered the items within their custody to form groupings. However, the manner by which collections are most often described differs among the information professions. As Randall C. Jimerson summarizes, it is common for each information profession to develop its own procedures to collect, organize, manage, and make accessible its resource materials, often borrowing techniques from other fields. Moving image archives are no exception.Traditionally, the choice in cataloging moving images has been at the item level, as description favors completed moving image works where titles and credits are transcribed from the film itself. This approach is borrowed from item level descriptive practices common in libraries. With the proliferation of digital content, increased publication and distribution of printt and media material, as well as the shift in the way users access information, a reconceptualizing of this strict item level approach, considering the array of emerging standards within a variety of professional communities, is underway."
McCrea, D.E. (2006). Getting more for less: testing a new processing model at the University of Montana. American Archivist, 69(2), 284-290.
Note: This paper presents a case study in backlog management. The author discusses how a new approach to both the philosophy and practice of archival processing, largely inspired by the recommendations of Mark A. Greene and Dennis Meissner in their article "More Product, Less Process," resulted in a decrease in both processing time and in the backlog of unprocessed collections at the University of Montana at Missoula.
Shepherd, E. (2006). Developing a new academic discipline: UCL's contribution to the research and teaching of archives and records management. Aslib Proceedings, 58(1/2), 10-19.
Note: The purpose of this article is to examine the historical development of archives and records management education in universities in England and review the state of research and teaching in the discipline in 2005.
Bourdon, F. (2005). The French translation of the EAC DTD: A few thoughts on interoperability with reference to authority data. Journal of Archival Organization, 3(2/3), 229-242.
Note: The translation into French of the Encoded Archival Context (EAC) DTD tag library has been in progress for a few months. It is being carried out by a group of experts gathered by AFNOR, the French national standards agency. The main goal of this group is to foster the interoperability of authority data between archives, libraries and museums, and the translation work provides an opportunity to think about the choices for standardization that underlie the EAC DTD, particularly in relation to ISAAR(CPF). It is also an excellent way of gaining familiarity with the DTD and thereby answering the need of French information specialists to increase their competencies in the structuring of digital documents and data modeling. After explaining the standardization context in which the group is working, a few major themes in its thinking will be presented, in the hope of encouraging greater international cooperation in this field.
Evans, J., McKemmish, S., Bhoday, K. (2005). Create once, use many times: The clever use of recordkeeping metadata for multiple archival purposes. Archival Science, 5, 17-42.
Note: Metadata is a key component in the creation, management and preservation of electronic records, as well as their innovative use as archives, memory and knowledge. However metadata generation and deployment are currently resource intensive and application specific. Metadata creation is not usually fully automated. Metadata created in one application of potential relevance to other applications is not shared between applications. Although data modeling, mark up language and syntax initiatives are addressing the data representation requirements for metadata translation and exchange, this functionality has not as yet been utilized in the systems that support eGovernment and eBusiness processes, electronic recordkeeping and archival description. Moreover there has been little progress in relation to developing strategies and meta-tools for the translation of metadata attributes and values between schemas in these environments. The Monash Clever Recordkeeping Metadata (CRKM) project addresses the challenge of automating metadata creation and sharing metadata between business systems, current recordkeeping systems and archival systems. This paper explores the relevance of the CRKM project to future archival systems and the deployment of metadata for multiple archival purposes. It is presented as part of the Smart Metadata and the Archives of the Future session that aims to communicate the progress and findings of several inter-related collaborative research projects and standards initiatives. Other papers in the session report on the related work of the InterPARES 2 Description Research Team (Designing a Meta-Registry for the Registration, Analysis and Archival Extension of Pre-Existing Metadata), the San Diego Supercomputing Centerâ€™s development of Persistent Archives Technology (Metadata Tools and Sustainable Archives Technologies), and the ISO Metadata for Records Standard (Smart Metadata Research and International Standards).
Fox, M. (2005). Professional traning for encoded archival description in Europe. Journal of Archival Organization, 3(2), 71-82.
Note: This paper represents an abridgement of a panel session that reported on the status of training for archivists in the use of Encoded Archival Description (EAD) in seven countries (France, Germany, Netherlands, Portugal, Switzerland, United Kingdom and United States). It touched on related archival descriptive standards and practices and associated technological issues.
McCarthy, G., & Evans, J. The Open Resource Scholarly Network: new collaborative partnerships between academics, libraries, archives and museums.
Note: The Australian Science and Technology Heritage Centre (Austehc) has been collecting and disseminating information about the history of Australian science, technology and medicine, including data about archival resources, on the assumption that scholarly practice and the creation of new knowledge was based on free access to, and the citability of, existing knowledge. Despite the advent of enabling electronic network technologies, it appears that this assumption is not universally accepted. In this paper, we explore by way of real examples the benefits that come from the open sharing of information and knowledge, not just for researchers but for cataloguers, archivists, web publishers and other informatics professionals.
Ottosson, P. G. (2005). EAC and the development of national and European gateways to archives. Journal of Archival Organization, 3(2-3), 261-274.
Note: In the development of gateways to archives there are two different approaches, one focusing on the descriptions of the material and the other on the creators. Search and retrieval with precision and quality require controlled access points and name authority control. National registries of private archives have a long tradition in implementing the concept of archival authority records for corporate bodies, persons and families. With the development of the standards ISAAR (CPF) and EAC, a foundation is laid for developing this approach in the archival community, and for the provision of common access points to library and museum resources as well. The Linking and Exploring Authority Files (LEAF) project (2001-2004) was co-funded by the European Commission Information Society Technologies Programme and a consortium of fifteen partners, libraries, archives, documentation and research centers, in ten European countries. The major objective of the LEAF project was to provide shared access to authority information from various data providers, and thereby improve search and retrieval functionalities. LEAF adopted EAC as the format for both importing and storing authority records. The user interface allows for searching on names, dates, and free text. Registered users have also the right to add annotations to records, thereby helping cataloguers in improving their quality. In cases where data providers have open access catalogues, there are links to the original authority records and related resources. The LEAF project has provided a data model and technical solutions that can be implemented in both national and international gateways to archives.
Pitti, D. V. (2005). Technology and the transformation of archival description. Journal of Archival Organization, 3(2/3), 9-22.
Note: The emergence of computer and network technologies has presented the archival profession with daunting challenges as well as inspiring opportunities. Archivists have been actively imagining and realizing the application of advanced technologies to their professional functions and activities. Using advanced technologies, archivists have been transforming archival description, freeing it from the limits of traditional media. Markup and database technologies are the two most prevalent methods for representing textual information. Each best represents and exploits textual data with different though complementary characteristics. Researchers and developers are increasingly working to integrate the two technologies. The integration of the two technologies will enable archivists to collaboratively further the ongoing transformation of archival description.
Stockting, B., & Queryoux, F. (Eds.) (2005). Encoding Across Frontiers: Proceedings of the European Conference on Encoded Archival Description and Context (EAD and EAC). Binghampton, NY: The Hawthorth Information Press.
Note: Conference proceedings.
Szary, R. V., Beinecke, C. S. (2005). Encoded archival context (EAC) and archival description: Rationale and background. Journal of Archival Organization, 3(2-3), 217-227.
Note: The use of contextual information about the creators and users of archival and manuscript resources has always been a critical method for discovering and providing access to them. Traditionally, this information has been unstructured and ephemeral, being part of the knowledge that experienced staff bring to reference queries. The development of Encoded Archival Context provides a methodology and structure for recording this information about the characteristics of creators and the circumstances of creation more explicitly and in ways that it can be used to support discovery of archival and manuscript sources.
Thurman, A. C. (2005). Metadata standards for archival control: An introduction to EAD and EAC. Cataloging and Classification Quartery, 40(3/4), 183-212.
Note: This article provides a concise guide to the structure and use of the Encoded Archival Description (EAD) and Encoded Archival Context (EAC) metadata standards. After a brief outline of archival description, the finding aid, and the objectives behind EAD, the structure of EAD is examined in detail. Discussion of all of the important elements in the EAD document-type definition (DTD) will be supplemented with examples of actual finding aids and their encoding, with attention to the common necessity of â€œreengineeringâ€ existing finding aids. The current status of EAD implementation and some issues affecting the widespread adoption of EAD are considered. A close look at the emerging EAC standard closes the article, providing key element definitions from the EAC Tag Library (Beta version, Feb. 2004), and examples of EAC records-including early implementations such as the University College London's LEADERS project.
Vitali, S. (2005). What are the boundaries of archival context? The SIASFI Project and the Online Guide to the Florence State Archives, Italy. Journal of Archival Organization, 3(2/3), 243-260.
Note: Creating archival descriptions in a digital environment and communicating across the Internet is not the same as traditional paperbased communication. As in other cultural domains, in archival description the medium influences the structure and content of information. The Siasfi Project and the Online Guide to the State Archives of Florence are good examples of these transformations. The article presents the main features of the Online Guide and discusses the theoretical and methodological assumptions underlying its conceptual model which are rooted in the international descriptive standards, ISAD(G) and ISAAR (CPF), as well as in a complex view of what archival context is.
Borbinha, J. (2004). Authority control in the world of metadata. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 38(3), 105-116.
Note: This paper discusses the concept of â€œmetadataâ€ in the scope of the â€œdigital library,â€ two terms recently used in a great diversity of perspectives. It is not the intent to promote privilege of any particular view, but rather to help provide a better understanding of these multiple perspectives. The paper starts with a discussion of the concept of digital library, followed by an analysis of the concept of metadata. It continues with a discussion about the relationship of this concept with technology, services, and scenarios of application. The concluding remarks stress the three main arguments assumed for the relevance of the concept of metadata: the growing number of heterogeneous genres of information resources, the new emerging scenarios for interoperability, and issues related to the cost and complexity of current technology.
Ferreira, M., Ramalho, J.C. (2004). DigitArq: creating a historical digital archive. Conferencia da Associacao Portuguesa de Sistemas de Informacaco, 5, Lisboa.
Note: In this paper we present the steps followed in a project called DigitArq that aimed at building a centralised repository for archival finding aids. At the Arquivo Distrital do Porto, finding aids existed in several different formats and media. Migration was used to convert all the finding aids into a single normalised format based on an international standard â€“ the EAD/XML. After migration, archival management software was developed to maintain the collected information and assist archivists in the creation of new finding aids. Archival finding aids are described by hierarchical structures which can easily be described in XML but present interesting issues while using Relational Databases. The relational data model employed is described in detail together with the reasons that made us choose this kind of implementation. Some statistics of the migration process will also be discussed in order to give the audience some insight about the legacy problem and the necessary investment to deal with it.
Haruyoshi, G. (2004). A state of EAD and EAC on the management of archives in Japan: The possibilities of the practices by the XML. Journal of Japan Society of Information and Knowledge, 14(3), 35-43.
Note: Now, BAD, Encoded Archival Description and EAC, Encoded Archival Context are known as de-facto International Standard of archival electronic finding aids. This article surveys the path to application experiment of EAD and EAC for the Japanese archives. And it shows the possibility of EAD and EAC that the use of XML clarifies. As a result, we will realize the following: The archival data constructed along EAD/EAC function as not only the finding aids but also basic information resources or "real" archival descriptions. Those data will be variously reused with the aid of elementary XML technology.
Jimerson, R. C. (2004). The future of archives and manuscripts. OCLC Systems & Services, 20(1), 11-14
Note: The archival profession faces many challenges in the near future, including electronic records, new technology, defining the profession, diversity, cooperation with other information professions, access to records, and enhancing the public image of archivists. Individual archivists and manuscripts curators also face daily challenges of resources, funding, and time. However, there are many resources available for learning more about manuscripts and archives.
Mason, J. (2004). "Context and metadata for learning, education and training" in Rory McGreal (Ed.) Online Education Using Learning Objects, pp. 168-182 RoutledgeFarmer: London.
Note: First paragraph of abstract: "This chapter highlights the issue of context in determining what might best inform the next generation of metadata schema that will in turn best support learning, education and training. Context can be understood as a critical component in the value-chain that renders data and information into knowlede. it is also multi-faceted and can be viewed through many lenses - such as social, historical, academic, vocational, computational, etc. As the story of the e-learning industry evolves it has been accompanied by a growing mix of stakeholder participation in the various forums focused on interoperability specifications and standards."
Pitti, D. V. (2004). Creator description: Encoded Archival Context. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 38(3-4), 210-226 .
Note: Encoded Archival Context (EAC) is an ongoing initiative within the international archival community to design and implement a prototype standard based on Extensible Markup Language (XML) for encoding descriptions of record creators: individuals, families, and organizations that create records. EAC is intended to represent the descriptive data prescribed in the International Council for Archives' International Standard Archival Authority Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families (ISAAR(CPF)). Description of record creators is an essential component of the preservation of the documentary evidence of human activity. A standard for creator description has many professional as well as economic benefits. EAC promises to enhance access and understanding of records as well as provide an important resource independent of record description. EAC also promises to enable repositories to share creator description. Given the costs of authority control and description, such sharing potentially will be an important economic benefit. As an XML-based standard, EAC specifies the semantic and structural features of creator description. The developers of EAC hope that the archival community will be able to collaborate with similar efforts in other cultural heritage communities.
Sexton, A., Yeo, G., Turner, C., & Hockey, S. (2004). User feedback: testing the LEADERS demonstrator application. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 25(2), 189-208.
Note: The LEADERS Project has developed a set of open-source tools that can be used by archivists to create online applications where digital representations of archive documents are presented alongside relevant contextual information. These tools use Extensible Markup Language (XML) technologies and are built around three well-known encoding standards: Encoded Archival Description (EAD), Encoded Archival Context (EAC) and the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI). A fundamental aspect of the LEADERS Project has been to gain user feedback as part of the research and development process. To this end, a demonstrator application has been constructed and has since been tested by a representative sample of archive users who took part in moderated discussions on its strengths and weaknesses. This article describes the results from the user testing of the demonstrator and discusses how different types of users reacted to the application's interface design, search functionality and detailed displays. It is hoped that this feedback from users will be useful to future implementers as a guide in the design of new online archive applications created using the LEADERS tools.
Sexton, A., Turner, C., Yeo, G., & Hockey, S. (2004). Understanding users: a prerequisite for developing new technologies. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 25(1), 33-49.
Note: The LEADERS Project has sought to develop innovative methods of delivering archive material to users via the Internet. In practice, this has been achieved through the development of open-source tools that can be used by Archivists to build on-line applications where transcripts and images of archive documents are delivered alongside contextual information from finding aids and authority records. This article explains how and why archive users have been placed at the centre of the LEADERS Project. It focuses on our preliminary research into who is currently visiting archive repositories and introduces our segmentation model for profiling types of users, as well as the results of our user survey, which we based on this model. This research was a prerequisite for the project: it has given us a broad understanding of the market for our product and has provided us with the background data necessary to ensure that we can go on to engage a representative sample of users to give us feedback on our work.
Vitali, S. (2004). Authority control of creators and the second edition of ISAAR(CPf), International Standard Archival Authority Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 38(3), 185-199.
Note: The International Standard Archival Authority Record (Corporate Bodies, Persons, Families), ISAAR(CPF), is a standard developed by the International Council on Archives for the management of creators of archives in archival descriptive systems. Since 2001, ISAAR(CPF) has been undergoing a revision process which will conclude at the next International Congress of Archives in Vienna in August 2004 when a second edition of the standard will be issued. The draft of the new edition of the standard, prepared by the Committee on Descriptive Standards, contains various changes in comparison with the first edition. The paper describes these changes, discussing their theoretical relevance, methodological implications, and practical consequences in archival descriptive systems. It focuses in particular on the new features of ISAAR(CPF) which enhance the possibility of establishing relationships between archival description systems and bibliographic catalogues, sharing or exchanging authority data on corporate bodies, persons, and families which are creators of archives or responsible for the creation or edition of books.
Dryden, J. (2003). Cooking the perfect custard. Archival Science, 3(1), 27-42.
Note: A unified Canadian/US descriptive code is the aim of the Canadian/US Task Force on Archival Description (CUSTARD). Within the framework of the International Council on Archives' General International Standard Archival Description (ISAD(G)) and the International Standard Archival Authority Record (ISAAR(CPF)), this Task Force, an NEH-funded project, is reconciling the US cataloging code, Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts (APPM), with the Canadian Rules for Archival Description (RAD). In this article, the learnings of the process of blending two established descriptive standards are presented in a preliminary way.
Kaiser, M., Lieder, H.-J., Majcen, K., & Vallant, H. (2003). New ways of sharing and using authority information. D-Lib Magazine, 9(11).
Note: Describes the way in which the LEAF project utilized EAC. "In order to be able to compare individual records and thus make them available for further operations, LEAF had to define one common exchange format into which all records, independently of their native format, can be converted. LEAF has adopted the emerging standard EAC (Encoded Archival Context) for this purpose."
Roegiers, J. (2003). Integrated resource discovery and access of manuscript materials: The user perspective. Liber Quarterly, 13 (3/4), 319-328.
Note: Recent developments in ICT have given hope to users of manuscript materials that some of their old problems will now be solved. Their primary question is possibly to be understood by the librarians and archivists who, more or less jealously, keep the treasures they are interested in. Strangely enough, the world of users is very often not so familiar to them. The worlds of librarians and archivists often differ more by the methods they use, than by the material they manage. To know which manuscript materials are kept by who is not always simple. National traditions, the fortuities of history and legal regulations have produced intricate situations that cry for better cooperation between those two worlds. According to the manuals used in the education of librarians or archivists, the definition of 'archives' is clear and unambiguous, but if you compare the manuals used in different countries, you observe fundamental differences, even contradictions. The best-known example is what is mostly called in English, private papers, in German NachlÃ¤sse, in Italian spogli, but in French, Dutch and other languages you read archives privÃ©es or something similar. In fact these collections of letters, personal notes and other documents received or written by a single person and kept by him/her, are not considered archives in the true sense by most nineteenth-century archivists and in the Anglo-Saxon tradition, where 'archives' is synonymous with 'public papers' or better 'public records'. Consequently, you rarely have to look for private papers in British archival institutions, but in libraries. In most cases the content of the collection is described according to the rules of manuscript cataloguing, whereas in those countries where private papers form an important part of archival collections, they are described according to archival standards.
Dryden, J. (2002). The CUSTARD Project: An update. Journal of Archival Organization, 1(3), 87-100.
Note: This is the first in what will be a regular column in JAO. The column will discuss standards, rules, and guidelines related to the organization of, and access to, archival materials. The column will be a means of increasing awareness of the wide range of standards that affect this area, providing information about specific standards, and keeping readers informed of the development of new standards and revisions of existing standards. It is hoped that readers will find the column informative, educational, and, on occassion, provocative. Suggested topics for future columns are welcome, as are comments on the current offering.
Dryden, J. (2002). Standards: News, progress reports, and reviews. Journal of Archival Organization, 1(4), 97-102.
Note: This is the second of a regular column in JAO that discusses standards, rules, and guideline related to the organization of, and access to, archival materials. The column serves as a means of increasing awareness of the wide range of standards that affect this area, providing information about specific standards, and keeping readers informed of the development of new standards and revisions of exisiting standards. It is hoped that readers will find the column informative, educational, and, on occasion, provocative. Suggested topics for future columns are welcome, as are comments on the current offering.
Hill, A. (2002). Bringing archives online through the archives hub. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 23(2), 239-248.
Note: (from the introduction) The funding opportunities and technological developments of the past 5 years are twin drivers that have transformed the way in which UK archive services make information available. Traditional differences between repositories, sectors and domains are beginning to be eroded by the adoption of shared standards and by participation in collaborative projects. The vision of a National Archives Gateway outlined in the National Council on Archives 1998 report, Archives On-line, is now within reach. A number of 'strands' of the National Archives Network have now been developed, which included A2A (Access to Archives, covering repositories in England), AIM25 (Archives in the M25 area) and SCAN (the Scottish Archive Network). The Archives Hub covers archives that are held in the higher and further education sector throughout the UK. This article describes the evolution of the Archives Hub service and highlights some of the technological advances that have been made during the development of the project. It then goes on to examine the future possibilities for resource discovery across all archive sectors and ultimately across the museum, archive, and library domains.
Redding, C. (2002). Reengineering finding aids revisited: Current archival descriptive practice and its effect on EAD implementation. Journal of Archival Organization, 1(3), 35-50.
Note: The technical issues surrounding the implementation of the Encoded Archival Description (EAD) seem to overshadow the importance of archival descriptive standards in developing access tools for our historical collections. Influenced by Dennis Meissner's 1997 American Archivist article on EAD and reengineering finding aids at the Minnesota Historical Society, the author posed eight hypotheses and conducted an online survey of repositories creating EAD finding aids to test his theories. The results indicate that archivists are clearly lacking in applying content standardization in their descriptive work. The author urges the profession to become more concerned with developing data content standards and best practice guidelines to ensure proper data exchange. As he states, â€œPatience on this end . . . is more important to the field than increasing the number of available finding aids available online to users. Putting EAD finding aids online with malformed content only serves to pollute the archival data pool. Learning data content standards early in the process not only improves the richness of our archival representations, but will also help create a more uniform user experience across repositories down the