[Moims-dai] OAIS SC 235: OAIS Preservation Issues
D or C Sawyer
Sawyer at acm.org
Sun May 20 15:56:12 UTC 2018
Some comments below:
> On May 18, 2018, at 2:35 AM, John Garrett <garrett at his.com> wrote:
> Hi Don,
> I certainly agree that your input is well-crafted and thought-provoking.
> I think it could be used as a basis for one or more paper submissions to some of our digital preservation conferences.
> It also provokes questions of what needs to be updated in the OAIS. I’ll have to give that more thought.
I’ve given it some thought, but I think it would be more productive to focus on what consensus can be reached before focusing too much on OAIS updates - as hard as that is to do!
> For me, some parts seem to metaphysical/philosophical to be practically included in OAIS. Other parts I see as almost requiring that we make some updates to OAIS.
I agree, and it was not written to be OAIS updates but to try to present a persuasive case.
> One place I believe that we need to make updates is in discussions of PDI content being Information Objects. Based on your interpretation of directly viewable information/documents not being Information Objects (which interpretation I agree with), then we can’t say that, for example, Provenance Information is an Information Object. It could be, but is not required to be an Information Object. It will only be an Information Object if it requires and has Representation Information associated with it. This is all closely related to Representation Information Networks. At some point the Network needs to end.
Yes, that is a valid ‘take away’ from what I wrote when one agrees that, for example, a hardcopy document is not an Information Object. While we mention that Data can be physical or digital, we focus on digital because that is a particularly hard problem for preservation. I think we need a little more recognition of the role of physical that accompanies digital preservation - in part because only something physical is actually able to convey information perceptible to humans. The digital must get transformed to physical signals, whether via hardcopy, or hardware with software, to actually convey an understanding to a human, or an experience to a human, or both.
> I think you’ve expressed well the experience and/or understand bit much better than we’ve done so far. We’ve discussed that before and for me that is getting addressed through the introduction of the Preservation Objectives and Transformational Information Properties which for me allows for “understanding” that allows experiences – e.g. understanding the b/w photo means that the Designated Community must be able to view it.
I’m not in accord with the OAIS draft definition for Preservation Objectives, which are examples. My use of ‘preservation objectives’, which could be named differently but I think are more aptly named, are precise and something that an Archive can actually be responsible for identifying and preserving.
> This is also closely related to our understand and/or use discussions that we added in the previous update. I think we’ve found that to be confusing to people and leads us down all kinds of rabbit holes when start talking about systems understanding the information. Again I expected David’s introduction of Preservation Objectives and TIPs to help in that regard also.
As I said, I think the current draft Preservation Objectives is not helpful because it is all too open ended to be something an Archive could accomplish. Maybe a different name?
> I think the Preservation Objectives and TIPs also handle much of the Information presentation concerns.
We want the OAIS Reference Model to be as clear as we can make it so that people reading it will understand as precisely as possible what is meant and so they can use the terms and concepts in the same fashion.
> I agree that Information presentation is an important concept and we probably should discuss it more in OAIS. However I’m not sure that I agree that the current OAIS doesn’t allow for experiential information. Certainly we should tweak the definitions if that is how others see it.
We use ‘understand’ throughout OAIS and it has been critical to the idea of possibly needing updates to keep information ‘understandable’ to an evolving Designated Community. From an information preservation perspective, I doubt anyone reading current OAIS would think that ‘understand’ means anything more than its usual definition, which in a preservation context is typically something like ‘perceive the intended meaning’. You mention above that for you, “understanding” can allow experiences such as a Designated Community must be able to view it. For me, this would require an OAIS definition of ‘Understand’ that is much broader than its common understanding (normal use) and would lead to less precision in communication. I think OAIS would then finds it needs to have ‘Understand (sense 1') and ‘Understand (sense 2)’ used at various places in the document. I find it would be more precise and less confusing to talk about ‘experience’ directly.
> Certainly we’ll want to discuss this more.
> Peace and joy,
> From: MOIMS-DAI [mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Mike Kearney
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 6:34 PM
> To: 'MOIMS-Data Archive Interoperability' <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
> Subject: Re: [Moims-dai] OAIS SC 235: OAIS Preservation Issues
> Don, I have to say that was a well-crafted and thought-provoking writeup, especially the first section. I think I got both knowledge and an experience (pleasurable) out of reading that.
> All: I fully support Don’s suggestion to add experience preservation as a salient component of the concept of OAIS. Bear in mind that I’m the new guy, so that may or may not lend the concept credibility.
> Don, in the process of adding the missing component, you focused on the term “experience”. I have always held a concept that the brain maintains a “software model” of the environment. Once the sensory inputs come in, they add to that software model and the increasing fidelity of that model can, I think, be equated to gaining knowledge and experience. In support of that, here’s a statement from a professional article <http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003422> that says “the brain represents a model of its environment and offers predictions about the world.”
> That software model of the environment in the brain may be where knowledge and experience (while perhaps separate concepts during transport from the picture on the wall to the brain) may merge back together to be one thing… that software model of the environment. So… I don’t know if that helps or hurts your case. But I think your point is… OAIS needs process/mechanisms that are guaranteed to handle both traditional knowledge and less-tangible experiential knowledge... experience.
> I really like your example of the black-and-white picture on the wall. One person may take away only the memory of a black and white image on a wall, and nothing more. Another person, seeing the black-and-white image of soldiers in the trenches in WWI may take away only the knowledge that soldiers were dirty. Another may look into that image and be transported to that environment in WWI, experiencing it as much as the media allows. Which is knowledge and which is experience? May be difficult to draw the line. And if that photo of soldiers in WWI has Wonder Woman PhotoShopped into it, that conveys something completely different… fantasy rather than knowledge. Or can fantasy be knowledge also?
> Anyhow… very thought-provoking. Thanks, Don. Hope I didn’t generate “spoilers” for those that haven’t read it yet.
> -=- Mike
> Mike Kearney
> Huntsville, Alabama, USA
> From: MOIMS-DAI [mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>] On Behalf Of D or C Sawyer
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 10:53 AM
> To: MOIMS DAI List <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>>
> Subject: [Moims-dai] OAIS SC 235: OAIS Preservation Issues
> After taking a more detailed look at digital preservation concepts than I did originally as a co-editor of the OAIS RM, I now find I missed an important aspect of information and its presentation to human senses. There is also an error in Representation Information modeling as it is not always an Information Object. This paper is my attempt to pull this together into what I hope is understandable and convincing.
> MOIMS-DAI mailing list
> MOIMS-DAI at mailman.ccsds.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the MOIMS-DAI