Collection and Preservation of At-Risk Digital Geospatial Data:

North Carolina Geospatial Data Archiving Project (NDIIPP Partnership) Steve MorrisHead of Digital Library InitiativesNCSU Libraries

Library of Congress Brown Bag Discussion Dec. 15, 2005

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 2

Project Context

Partnership between university library (NCSU) and state agency (NCCGIA)Focus on state and local geospatial content in North Carolina (state demonstration)Tied to NC OneMap initiative, which provides for seamless access to data, metadata, and inventory informationObjective: engage existing state/federal geospatial data infrastructures in preservation

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 3

Targeted Content

Resource TypesGIS “vector” (point/line/polygon) dataDigital orthophotography Digital mapsTabular data (e.g. assessment data)

Content ProducersMostly state, local, regional agenciesSome university, not-for-profit, commercialSelected local federal projects

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 4

Geospatial data types: Vector data

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 5

Time series – vector dataParcel Boundary Changes 2001-2004, North Raleigh, NC

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 6

Geospatial data types: Aerial imagery

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 7

Geospatial data types: Aerial imagery

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 8

Geospatial data types: Aerial imagery

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 9

Time series – Ortho imageryVicinity of Raleigh-Durham International Airport 1993-2002

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 10

Geospatial data types: Tabular data (w/vector)

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 11

Today’s geospatial data as tomorrow’s cultural heritage

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 12

Risks to Digital Geospatial Data

.shp

.mif

.gml

.e00

.dwg

.dgn

.bsb

.bil

.sid

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 13

Risks to Digital Geospatial Data

Producer focus on current dataTime-versioned content generally not archives

Future support of data formats in questionVast range of data formats in use--complex

Shift to web services-based accessArchives have been a by-product of providing access

Preservation metadata requirementsDescriptive, administrative, technical, DRM

GeodatabasesComplex functionality

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 14

Industry Shift to Web Services

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 15

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 16

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 17

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 18

Work plan in a Nutshell

Work from existing data inventories

NC OneMap Data Sharing Agreements as the “blanket”, individual agreements as the “quilt”

Partnership: work with existing geospatial data infrastructures (state and federal)

Technical approachMETS with FGDC, PREMIS?, GeoDRM?

Dspace now; re-ingest to different environment

Web services consumption for archival development

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 19

Big Challenges

Format migration paths

Management of data versions over time

Preservation metadata

Harnessing geospatial web services

Preserving cartographic representation

Keeping content repository-agnostic

Preserving geodatabases

More …

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 20

Vector Data Format OptionsOption A: use an open format and have a really unfortunate transformation and limited vendor support for the output objectOption B: use closed format but retain the original content and count on short- and medium-term vendor support. Option C: do both to buy time and look for an open, ASCII-based solution. (watch GML activity)

No sweet spot, just an evolving and changing mix offlawed options that are used in combination.

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 21

Preservation Metadata Issues

FGDC MetadataMany flavors, incoming metadata needs processing

Cross-walk elements to PREMIS, MODS?

Metadata wrapper/Content packagingMETS (Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard) vs. other industry solutions

Need a geospatial industry solution for the ‘METS-like problem’

GeoDRM a likely trigger—wrapper to enforce licensing (MPEG 21 references in OGIS Web Services 3)

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 22

Metadata Availability

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 23

Preserving Cartographic Representation

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 24

Interest in how geospatial content interacts with widely available digital repository software

Focus on salient, domain-specific issues

Challenge: remain repository agnosticAvoid “imprinting” on repository software environment

Preservation package should not be the same as the ingest object of the first environment

Tension between exploiting repository software features vs. becoming software dependent

Repository Architecture Issues

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 25

Project Status

Completing inventory analysis stage

Storage system and backup deployed

DSpace deployed to production

Metadata workflow finalized

Ingest workflow near finalization

Content migration workflow near finalization

Regional site visits planned for coming months

Wide range of outreach/collaboration: FGDC, ESRI, EDINA (JISC), USGS, OGC, TRB, etc.

Pilot project, georegistering digital archival geologic maps

Note: Percentages based on the actual number of respondents to each question 26

Questions?

Contact:

Steve MorrisHead, Digital Library InitiativesNCSU LibrariesSteven_Morris@ncsu.edu