[Personal_archives] FW: Heartfelt thanks to Sue

Fri Nov 20 14:10:20 EST 2009

Well, it occurs to me that Sue may be heading home for the weekend if she hasn't gone already.  (Not to discourage any late Friday comments from Canada or the U.S., but...)
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Sue for being such an interactive guest on the personal archives listserv.  We've benefitted a great deal from hearing your particular experiences in developing the Paradigm project and pursuing the test cases.  This experience has helped us hone in on the particular approaches we need to push our own projects forward in terms of digital and hybrid archives and this is thanks to your very specific comments in answer to all of our questions.  Thank you too to those of you who shared dilemmas (email scanned back into digital indeed!) and approaches they've refined for their own particular situations or experiences.  

This dialogue has certainly been a success.
Warm thanks to all for your enthusiasm.
Catherine

P.S. it's officially over but there is nothing to discourage you from making further comments or carrying any one of these topics forward on the listserv.  As always, we're all ears!

-----Original Message-----
From: Susan E Thomas [mailto:susan.thomas at bodley.ox.ac.uk]
Sent: Fri 11/20/2009 11:23 AM
To: Hobbs, Catherine; Rodney Carter; Personal_archives at mailman.yale.edu
Subject: RE: [Personal_archives] Original Order for digital records

> I wonder, Sue, if the FutureArch project or further thoughts 
> about the Paradigm project have presented new ways of 
> appraisal or mapping of the creator's overlapping digital 
> worlds in cases where the creator has an extremely complex 
> digital life (using mobile media, traditional email and 
> desktop, and storage of their documents on the web)?  

In all honesty, the Bodleian has yet to receive an archive that
represents quite this degree of complexity. The only mobile device we
have in our possession at present is a Psion organiser once used by the
department of Western Manuscripts, and we acquired that with a view to
experimentation. We've dealt with overlapping stores in terms of
different computers, disks, snapshots of material, etc., but we've yet
to acquire online materials from real depositors. Forensic analysis
tools have been very helpful in appraising the material:  we create a
'case' and add all the different components to it (the 'evidence'); we
can then use the various filtering, sorting and searching tools
available to help us understand what we have. 

Returning to mobiles for a moment. I'm not sure how easy it will be to
acquire mobile devices from depositors. When in use they are so central
to everyday life, but when replaced by a new device are they retained or
recycled? I suspect it's the latter. We happen to have a fine collection
of old PDAs at home, but I'm not sure that's normal! We don't have a
fine collection of old mobile phones, but with the convergence of phones
and PDAs (and much more besides) maybe we will start to keep them?

> Can we think of archival description as including diagrammes of the 
> creators' lifestyle, for example? 

Yes, I think so. To do some things would require that we create metadata
to tag items/folders/disks (perhaps as representing one or more aspects
of the creators' lifestyle); that might not be feasible with the
resources we have, but it could be possible if the material can be
exposed to user tagging online (unlikely for many personal archives for
a while yet). What might be more realistic is to leverage metadata that
is more easily obtained, automating keyword extraction to build indexes,
maybe using email header information to visually map out correspondence
networks - who emails who and how often (for example:
http://smg.media.mit.edu/papers/Viegas/themail/viegas_themail.pdf and
http://smg.media.mit.edu/papers/Viegas/themail/viegas_themail.pdf).

> Secondly, what became of the whole issue of recovering erased 
> files from old hard drives?  Have you had creators who have 
> agreed to let these stand as records?   I work with some 
> literary archival creators who seem to be open to the 
> possibility of recovering erased files (i.e. they seem to be 
> fairly comfortable with drafts of literary works being 
> recovered, not necessarily correspondence).  Have you 
> included issues of recovered files in transfer agreements?   
> The issue of what a creator meant to destroy and whether or 
> not this choice to destroy can or should be reversed raises 
> an ethical delemma if the creator is deceased (would you do 
> this in cases where the creator could not be consulted and 
> the estate was involved?) and new complexities to donor negotiations. 

We have yet to include this kind of issue in terms of agreement. We
haven't been working with forensics tools or digital materials long
enough to have this all mapped out, but I think we've a much better idea
of what we need to discuss with individuals now. It's an issue that's
cropped up at other archives and libraries dealing with forensics too.
As a result of that common concern, the Library is participating in an
investigation of the application of digital forensic techniques to
archives, and this study will explore ethical issues as well as others.
In the meantime, our approach has been to be careful. We have yet to be
tried by 'deleted' material that's particularly contentious, which is
helpful. The issue of deceased creators is troubling; I wonder whether
the decision might be made based on an evaluation of the material? When
it's made available to researchers we can certainly ensure that they
know it was previously deleted, allowing them to judge its significance
for themselves.

Susan Thomas
Digital Archivist/Project Manager
Bodleian Library

Web:  http://futurearchives.blogspot.com
Tel:    +44 (0) 1865 283821
Post: Oxford University Library Services
         Osney Mead, Oxford, OX2 0ES

> -----Original Message-----
> From: personal_archives-bounces at mailman.yale.edu 
> [mailto:personal_archives-bounces at mailman.yale.edu] On Behalf 
> Of Hobbs, Catherine
> Sent: 20 November 2009 14:15
> To: Rodney Carter; Personal_archives at mailman.yale.edu
> Subject: Re: [Personal_archives] Original Order for digital records
> 
> I too was caught by the new possibilities for exploring and 
> making evident original order in digital archives and also 
> presenting user-oriented orders.  Particularly the idea of 
> expressing different orders, evolutions of orders or even 
> parallel evolutions of orders depending on the number of 
> types of uses of digital technology by the creator in 
> combination with his/her various roles.  There are many 
> factors at play here that need to be teased when determining 
> arrangement (which have come up earlier in our discussion):  
> how does a choice to use a certain medium or free email 
> service overlap with the creator's own ideas of what they are 
> doing or role they are playing?  Which will become the 
> defining factor in the arrangement?
> 
> I wonder, Sue, if the FutureArch project or further thoughts 
> about the Paradigm project have presented new ways of 
> appraisal or mapping of the creator's overlapping digital 
> worlds in cases where the creator has an extremely complex 
> digital life (using mobile media, traditional email and 
> desktop, and storage of their documents on the web)?  Can we 
> think of archival description as including diagrammes of the 
> creators' lifestyle, for example? 
> 
> Secondly, what became of the whole issue of recovering erased 
> files from old hard drives?  Have you had creators who have 
> agreed to let these stand as records?   I work with some 
> literary archival creators who seem to be open to the 
> possibility of recovering erased files (i.e. they seem to be 
> fairly comfortable with drafts of literary works being 
> recovered, not necessarily correspondence).  Have you 
> included issues of recovered files in transfer agreements?   
> The issue of what a creator meant to destroy and whether or 
> not this choice to destroy can or should be reversed raises 
> an ethical delemma if the creator is deceased (would you do 
> this in cases where the creator could not be consulted and 
> the estate was involved?) and new complexities to donor negotiations. 
> 
> Catherine
> 
> 
> 
> Rick's question about the relevance original order of digital 
> collections last night got me thinking quite a bit. Is it 
> still relevant? If so, how do we express it in our finding aids?
> 
> While finding the notion of a singular "original order" 
> somewhat problematic given that it only reflects a particular 
> order at a particular time without easily acknowledging how 
> arrangement changes over time, I do believe the concept 
> remains relevant - perhaps more so than ever. Understanding 
> where people store their information, and with what other 
> files, and how these files are used and are moved over time 
> from one storage media and/or device (from floppy disk, to 
> harddrive, to USB, to "the cloud", etc.) will provide the 
> context needed to allow for a richer understanding of the information.
> 
> The Survey questions ask for exactly this type of 
> information. I wonder, however, how aware people are of their 
> own/their office's filing system.
> Personally, I frequently have to do a bit of digging to find 
> which of the several email addresses I sent a particular 
> message from or on which harddrive or external HD or USB key 
> I have a particular file saved.
> 
> Has the prompting through the Survey questions been 
> successful in identifying where donors' records are? [seeing 
> Michael & Susan's last emails which came in as I type it 
> seems this question has been answered - helpful as a starting 
> point but may require follow-up].
> 
> The description of the Barbara Castle collection's catalog 
> entry in Susan's email from Tuesday, with multiple "orders" 
> allowed their browser interface is certainly intriguing. It 
> could also be interesting to map the evolution of a digital 
> collection, tracing when & how files were created and moved 
> around, using the technical metadata held within the digital 
> files (I am only assuming this is possible given my rather 
> limited technical understanding of these sorts of things) or 
> through comparing "snapshots" of the disc images you 
> describe. I am thinking or something along the lines of the 
> timelines on the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine except 
> for personal fonds instead of webpages. This certainly would 
> acknowledge the fluid nature of the creator's original order(s).
> 
> 
> To briefly comment on Susan's question to me about the 
> Sisters' personal collections - you are correct, as an "in 
> house" archives, the problem of personal/professional it is 
> less of a concern than it might be in a collecting 
> institution. Individually, the Sisters vary greatly on their 
> record creating/keeping and what gets transferred from the 
> archives ranges from a few items to many boxes. Typically the 
> files are what you would find in most people's personal 
> collections - diaries & journals, correspondence, diplomas, 
> certificates & awards, photographs, art done by the Sisters, 
> also medical records and administrative records. To this 
> date, however, very little has been given digitally. What I 
> do have from the Sisters' personal digital collection is 
> mostly photographs which I have acquired by getting them to 
> allow me to copy the pictures onto a cd or a usb, which I 
> then house on the Archives' computer. While many are computer 
> literate, they still print seemingly everything. And this is 
> the unofficial position of the administration here: if it is 
> important it will be printed. I am not entirely convinced 
> however (there are occasional comments about "never knowing 
> what to keep" and "cleaning out my email/files" which send 
> shivers down my spine & despite telling the Sisters that I am 
> more than happy to help them out with their files I've yet to 
> be asked to assist). I am planning to to try to get copies of 
> files off the Sisters' computers on a regular basis. This 
> will serve as a backup for them with the added benefit of 
> having a scheduled transfer to the archives..or at least that 
> is how I plan to sell it to them. We'll see how that works ...
> 
> Rodney
> 
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 7:47 PM, <RICKBARRY at aol.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> >  [...]
> > All of this also makes one think about another aspect -- 
> the relevance 
> > of "original order" in digital collections.
> >  [...]
> > Regards,
> >
> > Rick
> >
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_archives mailing list
> Personal_archives at mailman.yale.edu
> http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/personal_archives
> 