Transcript
Page 1: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Preserving State GovernmentDigital Information

Minnesota Historical Society

NDIIPP Meeting

July 2008

Page 2: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Project Objectives

• Identify, capture, preserve, and provide access to “at risk” digital content from state legislatures

• Develop products to help other states assess capacity and adapt model

• Test the model in Minnesota

• Promote results through outreach and education

Page 3: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Project Partners

Project led by Minnesota Historical Society

– MN Office of the Revisor of Statutes– MN Legislative Reference Library– National Conference of State Legislatures– California Digital Library– CA State Archives, State Library, Legislative

Counsel– Other states: Illinois, Kansas, Vermont,

Mississippi, Tennessee

Page 4: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Collaboration

• Partner states: CA, KS, IL, VT, MS, TN

• Visits to each partner state to learn about their particular concerns

• Evaluation of gap between goals and capacity

• Meetings with interested groups and organizations

Page 5: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Partners: Analyzing Variables

• Audiences

• Mission

• Priorities

• Initiatives

• Capacity

• Resources

Page 6: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Issues Research

• Authentication of digital content• Accessibility requirements for online

content• Preservation options• Options for retrospective digitization• Records retention schedules• Survey of current legislative information

services/sites

Page 7: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Technology Research

• XML• APIs• RDF• Topic Maps• Google’s Sitemap Protocol

Spectrum of options from simple to complex based on infrastructure and technical skill requirements, cost, etc. – What is practical and appropriate?

Page 8: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Products in Development

White Papers:– Authentication– Access options (technologies)– Retrospective digitization– Records retention schedules for legislative

content– Preservation options

XML Schema– “Lowest common denominator” metadata

Page 9: Preserving State Government Digital Information

Next Steps

• Analyze results of first state partner meetings

• Continue issues research

• Evaluate of access technologies

• Develop cost-benefit analysis

• Start on Minnesota access pilot

• Hold all-partner meeting, St. Paul, 2009

• Revisit partner states, mid-2009

Page 10: Preserving State Government Digital Information

For More Information

Project Web Site:

www.mnhs.org/legislativerecords

Project Staff:Robert Horton Jennifer JonesProject Director Project Manager651.259.3240 [email protected]

[email protected]


Recommended