View
217
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
1
UPDATE ON PARTNER VISITSJanuary 18, 2013
1/18/2013 APTrust Update
APTrust Update 2
Conversations with partners
1/18/2013
Partner Visit date Participants DeanUNC 11/15/12 10 Sarah MichalakDuke 11/16/12 4 Deborah Jakubs
NCState 11/16/12 5 Susan NutterColumbia 11/29/12 4 Jim NealSyracuse 11/30/12 13 Suzanne Thorin
Notre Dame 12/14/12 13 Diane WalkerEmory 12/19/12 4 Rich Mendola
Hopkins 1/10/13 7 Winston TabbMaryland 1/11/13 16 Pat SteeleStanford 1/17/13 2 Mike Keller Michigan ?? Paul Courant
UVa ?? Karin Wittenborg
1/18/2013 APTrust Update 3
APTrust Update 41/18/2013
APTRUST
Future Proposed Services
DPN Replicating
Node
Aggregate Repository
1/18/2013 APTrust Update 5
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
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?
1/18/2013 APTrust Update 7
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
APTrust Update 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?
1/18/2013
APTrust Update 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
1/18/2013
APTrust Update 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.
1/18/2013
APTrust Update 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
1/18/2013
Recommended