[Update 7/10/2014: Our DSSOA D-Lib article now has a permanent link brought to you by perma.cc, a project which creates links to archived versions of web pages cited in your work! jrj]
“The Digital-Surrogate Seal of Approval: a Consumer-oriented Standard.” James A. Jacobs, University of California San Diego and James R. Jacobs, Stanford University. D-Lib Magazine, March/April 2013, Volume 19, Number 3/4. Also available in the Stanford Digital Repository and the University of California Escholarship Repository.
Abstract:
We propose the “Digital-Surrogate Seal of Approval” (DSSOA) as a simple way of describing digital objects created from printed books and other non-digital originals as surrogates for the analog original. The DSSOA denotes that a digitization accurately and completely replicates the content and presentation of the original. It can be used to express an intended goal during the planning stages of digitization and to guarantee the quality of existing digital surrogates. The DSSOA Criteria can be used to evaluate individual digital objects or entire completed collections. DSSOA is independent of production technologies and methodologies and focuses instead on the perspective of consumers — including libraries that rely on digital surrogates.
Endnotes
[1] Ames, Eric. “So We Can Throw These Out Now, Right?: What We Learned From Microfilming Newspapers and How It Shapes Our Digitization Strategy.” The Baylor University Libraries Digital Collections Blog. August 23, 2012.
[2] Bartram, Alan. 2001. Five hundred years of book design. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
[3] Bogus, Ian et al. 2012. Minimum Digitization Capture Recommendations (DRAFT). Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Preservation and Reformatting Section.
[4] Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR). (2001). The Evidence in Hand: Report of the Task Force on the Artifact in Library Collections (publication No. 103). Washington, D.C.
[5] FADGI. Still Image Working Group. A Resource List for Standards Related to Digital Imaging of Print, Graphic, and Pictorial Materials. Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative. January 28, 2010.
[6] Kenney, Anne R. “Digital Benchmarking for Conversion and Access.” In Kenney, Anne R., and Oya Y. Rieger. Moving Theory into Practice: Digital Imaging for Libraries and Archives. Research Libraries Group, 2000. p.24-60.
[7] Lavoie, Brian F., Constance Malpas, and J. D. Shipengrover. 2012. Print Management at “Mega-scale”: a Regional Perspective on Print Book Collections in North America. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research.
[8] Malpas, Constance. 2011. Cloud-sourcing Research Collections: Managing Print in the Mass- digitized Library Environment. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC Research.
[9] Owens, Trevor. “All Digital Objects Are Born Digital Objects.” The Signal: Digital Preservation. (May 15, 2012).
[10] Rieger, Oya. 2008. “Preservation in the Age of Large-Scale Digitization: A White Paper.”
[11] Schonfeld, Roger C., and Ross Housewright. (2009) What to Withdraw: Print Collections Management in the Wake of Digitization. Ithaka S+R.
[12] Snawder, Kristin. “Digitization is Different than Digital Preservation: Help Prevent Digital Orphans!” The Signal: Digital Preservation. (July 15th, 2011).
[13] Werner, S. (2012). Where material book culture meets digital humanities. Presented at the Geographies of Desire, University of Maryland.
[14] Wikipedia. “Canons of page construction.”
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Latest Comments