top of page

The following is a guest post by Jona Whipple, Digital Resources Librarian, Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute of Technology.

In the last week of March 2015, I had the opportunity to attend the first ever Law Repositories conference, made possible by a grant from AALL/Bloomberg Continuing Education Grants Program, and by the sponsorship of LIPA and bepress. I spent a weekend in beautiful, sunny Williamsburg, Virginia with many of my fellow “repositorians,” as we’ve come to brand ourselves, and learned so many things about the future of the institutional repository.

The official title of the conference was “Law Repositories: Shaping the Future,” and it’s never been clearer that this is exactly what we’re doing. The repository is no longer just the home of scholarly articles, built to provide and sustain open access for the legal research community and the world at large. This is still a very important part of the function of the law repository, but so many are now hosting diverse collections of information that are proving invaluable. The archive of opinions and orders of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals maintained in the Villanova University School of Law repository is evidence of this, as is the collection of historic Georgia digests and codes available for download from the University of Georgia Law repository. The University of Nebraska is using a portion of their repository to publish digital print-on-demand books under their publishing imprint, Zea E-Books. While repositorians are not necessarily shifting the focus from collections of scholarly work, they are definitely expanding the scope of what would traditionally be included in a law repository. This expansion not only energizes and excites those of us who work to make this content available, it also brings more focus to our repositories and our missions as champions of open access and protectors of information. The general attitude towards what should go into the repository seems to be: “Is anyone else providing access to this? Will it be helpful if we provide access? Let’s do it!”

Many of the sessions at the conference focused on these interesting non-traditional collections. Other sessions were along the lines of “how-to.” These sessions, such as “Using Metrics to Make Repository Decisions” and “Lightning Talks on Process” were helpful in theory and included lots of ideas and hints to motivate development. However, for the lone repositorian (as most of us are) who is responsible for every part of the repository workflow, discussions about creating Python scripts to automate back-end functions and monitoring Google Analytics via your iPhone to track possible download bots can be overwhelming. The reality of many of our day-to-day workflows is that we manage it all by ourselves and can’t spend a lot of our time writing code, compiling detailed statistics, and launching large-scale marketing campaigns. However, these sessions were valuable in that if we can put aside how much we’d love to have an entire department dedicated to building a robust and diverse repository that can become a leader in download counts, even those of us with a single person responsible for the repository’s growth can find inspiration for things we can do on our level.

I think there is a balance that has to be found by the lone repositorian: do what you can, when you can. Start with the collections that will be both easy to build and of interest to your audience. Take all the help you can get: student workers and virtual interns are your best friends. Don’t sweat it if you don’t have the capacity to wrangle scripts into doing the repetitive and time-consuming tasks for you. These things take time—but all good things come with time. The future can be shaped slowly, and with care.

 
 
 

Perma.cc has been nominated for a Webby in the law category!

There are five nominees per category, and the winner will be announced in late April. You can vote here.

LIPA is a supporting partner of Perma.cc, and we congratulate our colleagues at Harvard for this honor!

Margaret K. Maes Executive Director Legal Information Preservation Alliance

 
 
 

Sharon Bradley (UGA) and Beth Williams (LSU) tackled this topic during the Law Repositories 2015: Shaping the Future conference. I believe I’d call their debate a draw because ultimately I think the answer to that question lies in what you are trying to preserve and/or represent with a surrogate digital item.

Digitization or conversion of analog items provides many potential benefits for items:

  1. Preventing use (and potential destruction) of the original documents.

  2. Providing wider access to a given item if it is uploaded to a web platform.

  3. Providing access to individuals that are unable to travel to your physical location.

  4. Providing access to items that may be too fragile for an individual to handle.

  5. Providing access to items on outdated media.

But is this the definition of preservation? It really depends on the goals of your institution – and no two institutions are the same. Yes, as long as it is done correctly, digitization helps to preserve the original document because it provides access to content that doesn’t involve handling an original. However, you are creating a surrogate of an item, so it really depends on each individual researcher as to whether a digital surrogate meets their needs. To many it likely will because they care most about the intellectual content within a manuscript, letter, book, etc. However, there are researchers that will still want to see, hold, smell, etc. the original because their research interests are relevant to the physical medium.

One additional component to consider is that digitization is also not the final step in preservation. Digital formats change with regularity and just because you currently have a digital document in a preferred format doesn’t mean it will still be the preferred format a few years down the road. In order to ensure both long-term access and long-term preservation file formats will need to regularly be refreshed to the new standard/preferred format. Hand-in-hand with this is the idea of LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe). Having a single copy of a digital file is not going to be sufficient for long-term preservation. Technology fails, files corrupt, and natural disasters strike. So it’s important to duplicate your digital content and disperse copies to ensure continued preservation. Creating digital surrogates of analog items is a component of this – in the event something happens to the original, having a digital surrogate will at least ensure access to the intellectual content.

While all of these factors are important, the true answer to this question will ultimately vary by institution. There is no single strategy to ensure long-term preservation of materials. And while digitization can be, and often is, an important component of preservation, it isn’t always the answer nor is it the final step in the process.

 
 
 
bottom of page