Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 11 Next »

During FY15, we began to develop workflows and procedures for creating disk images of carriers and for removing files from these carriers. A number of collections were completely imaged, and the files are available for processing.

As each collection is worked with, we'll revisit and revise our currently basic workflows for processing born digital files.

 

What follows is a DRAFT workflow for working with files removed from carriers.

This is based on Susan Earle's July 2015 work with the Records of the HRPBA Oral History project, and on Cat Holbrook's work with the Mary Bunting Institute records in fall 2015. Every collection is, as we know, DIFFERENT (!) and workflows for different kinds of records and situations will vary. See below for how this workflow worked with different models of collections.

 

SURVEY

  1. Digital archivist Jen Weintraub is in charge of creating disk images/removing data from carriers. She should have completed this work by the time the collection is ready to be processed. Check in with her about where the working files are kept (on the R drive).
  2. Schedule a meeting with Jen and possibly Pablo Morales-Henry to assess the born digital files. They should be able to provide archivists with a list of files that were removed from carriers; and a list of carriers that could not be read. If carriers could not be read on the first try, archivists should assess (in collaboration with Jen and Pablo) whether or not we should pursue other options for reading those files.
  3. During your survey process, view (as best you can) the born digital files to be processed. Jen and Pablo can let you know which files can be viewed using Quickview at your own desk, and which files will need to be viewed on a forensic workstation.

APPRAISE

  1. Determine what kinds of files these are. Are they closely related to the paper files? Are they transcripts, drafts, diary entries? Do they have an intrinsic arrangement? Do they have folder titles that make sense?
  2. Decide which files to keep and which to discard. (NOTE: What happens to the discarded files? Susan would like clear instructions as to what to do with them, etc.)

 

PROCESS

  1. Describe electronic files in the finding aid. If they are related to paper files, intermingle them. If it seems more appropriate to have an entire series of electronic records, that's fine too.

    Some things to consider when determining how to describe the files:

                   Are the files restricted in any way?

                   Can you provide access to them directly out of the finding aid?

                   Are they complementary to paper files (e.g. are they drafts of a book project that already has a subseries or a number of paper files listed)

                   Are they arranged in meaningful folders on their carriers? Or are they just put on the carrier as a means of transport?

        2.  Access considerations. Can these files be linked through the finding aid? (Are there restrictions, has the donor agreed that material can be made available online?)

 

 

 

     (NOTE: I think we might want to sketch out some different scenarios to help people determine what might work best)

If you have word processing files and plan to create individual links from the finding aid, convert the files to PDF/As.

If appropriate to your processing/access scenario, rename individual files with their E# from the finding aid (file naming convention?)

If appropriate, work with Jen to deposit files into the DRS and link from finding aid.

 

MODEL A: Born digital files are closely related to the paper files, and (due to their file uniformity and small number) can easily be transformed into PDF/As, deposited into the DRS, and linked out through the finding aid.

EXAMPLE: HRPBA Oral History project: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:RAD.SCHL:sch01503

These born digital files were all word processing documents, and Susan knew from the disk names and the collection materials that they were intimately related to the other records (primarily audiotapes) in the collection. She reviewed the files on R, and determined that each electronic transcript would be a separate "E folder" in the finding aid, listed after the audiotape of the interview. She (with help from Cat?) transformed the word processing files into PDF/A files, Cat deposited those files int he DRS, and links to each file were added into the E folders in the finding aid.

 

 

  • No labels