Record Keeping and the Web

Johanne Pelletier McGill University ECURE October 12, 2002

Garron Wells University of Toronto

1

Session Objectives

• Review why preserving the web is an issue
  • Development of the web within IT framework
  • Archival/RM literature key issues
    
    
• Outline strategies and operational considerations for preservation
  
  
• Promote awareness of the importance of web site analysis for institutional accountability

2

University of Toronto

University of Toronto, ,est. 1827 Largest university in Canada 60,000 students 10,000 employees University Archives Archives & Records University Library (RBSC)

3

McGill University

McGill University Universitas 21 est. 1821 35,000 students 8,000 employees University Archives Archives & Records University Secretariat

4

Why the Web?

5

University Web Activity

Communications banner or brand client services recruitment student services & alumni Teaching/Outreach Teaching & Learning Research Administrative Functions

“New” University record: Static sites Calendars Administrative functions Interactive functions Admissions Teaching Access to Administrative data/Intranet applications HR Finance Student Records

6

Policy Gap?

• Site creation
• Content ownership
• “Vision” of the web/branding
• Content management
• Privacy/Risk
• Concurrence of sites with other records systems

7

Site Development Issues = Implications for Preservation

Content control & accuracy Branding “official” sites Compliance on “look and feel” Preservation formats & strategies Access and privacy Links/consistency

Relative url addresses XHTML use for all sites Minimize software dependence - use neutral formats Avoid use of proprietary search engines

8

Policy Infrastructure & Risks

RM & Preservation Strategy Web Policy IT Policy Administrative Research Teaching & Learning

? Content control data, records, information accuracy Ownership & management ? Uneven content across the university ? Accountability Risk loss of records Risk release of corporate information

9

Accountability and Records

10

Literature - Key Issues

• McClure/Sprehe Study - Risk Analysis
  
  
• Information Management Forum (IMF)
  
  
• National Archives of Australia (NAA)

11

McClure/Sprehe

Features of McClure and Sprehe study:

• identified confusion in terms 'record' and 'publication' when applied to web sites
  
  
• proposed guidelines for managing information on web sites based on records management theory
  
  
• developed risk model to analyze an organization’s accountability exposure

12

IMF

IMF Features:

• applied McClure/Sprehe model to Canadian government and its agencies
  
  
• added feature: Local Site repository
  
  
• separated responsibility for preservation of web site information between National Archives and the National Library

13

NAA

NAA Features:

• builds on McClure/Sprehe and IM Forum work
  
  
• simplifies risk assessment model
  
  
• provides practical strategies for storage and preservation of web-based resources for long term accessibility

14

NAA

15

Current Responses

16

Responses

• Policy level intervention
• Records management scheduling
  • Web sites as series
• Pilot projects
  • Snapshots - local site repositories
  • Intranet
• Comprehensive approaches:
  • Policy
  • Snapshot - LSR + Historical Log
  • Scheduling/Transfer/Preservation Strategy

17

Snapshot (Dollar Consulting)

• Complete, accurate, executable copy of a site or html page. Replicates al functionality of the site (option is to capture as object in PDF)
• Must also capture third-party web sites or links within the sites
• advocated by NARA and NAA for archival transfer
• PDF capture option (but cannot be exported back into HTML)

18

19

U. of T. Strategy

Strategies:

• assessing risk - records management strategies:
  • Accountability: Low, Moderate and High Risk Sites
  • Historical Log
  • Local Site Repository

20

U. of T. Strategy

21

22

Faculty of Arts and Science

Factors Public Visibility All pages viewable by general public and U. of T. community Little adverse criticism about content

Risk level High Low

Recordkeeping Response Continue to monitor reactions to content

23

24

Faculty of Arts and Science

Factors Purpose Disseminating (publishing) and sharing information Soliciting responses and feedback (via email) Provide some online services (POSt)

Risk level Moderate—High

Recordkeeping Response Level of risk increases if records and publications are only disseminated on web Ensure close integration with office’s record keeping system

25

Local Site Repository

• electronic repository, established under the control of an office for the purposes of temporarily managing dormant copies of that office’s electronically recorded information until the corporate recordkeeping system is adequate for the task
  
  
• replicates at time of posting all pages posted to an active web site in a separate storage device

26

Local Site Repository (Cont’d)

• Features:
  • is a means of reconstructing the information content of an active site;
  • facilitates the organized disposition of recorded information through:
    • controlled deletion
    • transfer of archival records to UTARMS (both publications and official records)

27

Historical Log

Is an offical record and is subject to a retention schedule

• Contains the following data elements:
  • Title or name of posting
  • Version number of posting
  • Originating author/office name, address, contact information. This is the Content Manager, the person or office responsible for content creation
  • Hyperlinks in this posting
  • Date of Initial posting
  • Date of last modification
  • Date of replacement or withdrawal
  • Disposition of posting after replacement or withdrawal

28

29

Faculty of Arts and Science

Factor Complexity Predominately static documents PDF forms Document-cuntred (low interactivity) POSt Access to ROSI

Risk Level Low - Moderate Low - Moderate

Recordkeeping Response Increase in dynamic and interactive documents will increase level of risk Assess adequency of record keeping system and integrate web records

30

31

Faculty of Arts and Science

Factor Frequency & Regularity of Change Irregular (i.e. as required) Infrequent (i.e. longer than 3 months between changes

Risk Level Low - Moderate

Recordkeeping Response Historical log Records retention and disposition Local site repository Transfer to UTARMS

32

Conclusion - U of T

University Archives role:

• Acquisition and Accessioning
• Arrangement and Description
• Use
• Preservation

33

34

35

Strategic Approach - RM/Archives

• Jurisdiction:
  • Archives Act & Privacy Legislation support RM (for records in all forms)
  • Combined RM/Archives program
  • Campus wide records retention schedule (approved by government agency)
  • Reports to Adminstration

36

Record Keeping “Culture”

Decentralized IT WEB: Uneven content across the university

RM Program Emerging web policy Infrastructure Emerging vision for IT development Record “aware” community

37

Cues - Key Factors

• Approach web as records - APPRAISE
  • Appraise sites (site development broadly) within records retention schedule
• “Look and Feel” preservation does not drive the process
• Policy development and infrastructure development before preservation

38

Ideally...

• Schedule the Web - RM
  • Treat web sites as a records series?
    • Transfer web sites and pages to archives “repository” & require that documentation accompany the transfer of sites and pages
    • Use policies requiring “required” documentation about web sites
      • Site content, creation, version control, technology platform supports
  • Impediments??

39

Operational Considerations

• Can your institutional archives manage electronic transfers?
  • Can the sites and pages be copied/reformatted to new storage media?
  • Secure environment with read only access
  • Back up copies
  • Disaster recovery, temperature/humidity

40

Comprehensive Strategy

• Policy leadership/development 2001
  • Senate Committee on Information Systems and Technology
• Site/page integration into records retention schedule (appraise sites as per risk analysis) 2002-
• Risk Analysis & Test projects (2002-)
  • Snapshots/local site repository

41

IT Policy & Web?

42

Policy “Agenda” - Key Areas

Technical infrastructure Content Management

43

Policy Issues - Beyond “Look and Feel”

• Technical infrastructure
  • Relative url addresses
  • XHTML use for all sites
  • Minimize software dependence - use neutral formats
  • Avoid use of proprietary search engines

44

Policy Issues - Beyond “Look and Feel”

• Management
  • Routine capture of major changes
  • Capture of audit trail metadata
  • Copy sites and pages
  • Minimize hardware dependence - transfer of sites to new storage media
  • Operational support for long-term preservation
  • Secure access to personal information
  • High risk sites/risk analysis/loss of data/information
  • Preservation of sites/retention
    • costs/operational demands to manage sites designated for preservation

45

Policy Issues - Beyond “Look and Feel”

• Content
  • Defines “official” content and sites (analogy to scheduled agencies in federal governments)
  • Site accuracy (risk in posting inaccurate content?)
  • Branding/hallmarking
  • Compliance campus-wide
  • Privacy and access considerations

46

Next: Administrative Computing

• Defining adminstrative computing
  • Information policy
  • Data/record/information << trustees >>
• Computing Model/Hardware Standardization
• Software Standardization
• Workflow/document management
• Integrated Archives/records Functions
• Office enabling software (Groupware solutions)
• Enterprise resource planning (custody, transfer of data between data holders)

47

Recommendations

• Clues from record keeping culture
  • Jurisdiction support & record keeping culture
    • Collaboration
    • Integration of RM
    • Policy development
    • Test pilot projects (snapshots)
    • Combined strategies

48

Recommendations

• Ensure operations can support preservation strategy
  • archives/records supported for long-term preservation

49

Recommendations

• Preservation strategy reflected in front-end policies
  • administrative, web policies
• Appraise sites/html as other records

50

Session Objective

• Review why preserving the web is an issue
  • Development of the web within IT framework
  • Archival/RM literature key issues
• Outline strategies and operational considerations for preservation
• Promote awareness of the importance of web site analysis for institutional accountability

51

Session Objectives - Summary

52

Session Objectives - Summary

• Why preserve the web? OR Where are we going?
  • “archival” approach applies across record formats (goal is the same - preserve records of long-term value, ensure accountability)

53

Session Objectives - Summary

• Strategies & Operational Issues
  • Strategies vary according to institutions
    • Preservation strategy must be supported by front-end policy
    • Archives/RM operational needs for preservation
  • Importance of Analysis
    • Ease of storage costs does not relieve responsibility for preservation

54

Bibliography

Educause (www.educause.edu/policy/policy.html)
IM Forum Internet and Intranet Working Group.
Managing internet and intranet information for long term access and accountability - implementation guide. Sept. 24, 1999
http://www.imforumgi.gc.ca/consult/inter-intra/implement2_e.pdf

McClure, Charles and J. Timothy Sprehe.
Analysis and development of model quality guidelines for electronic records management on state and federal websites. January, 1998.
http://istweb.syr.edu/~mcclure/nhprc/nhprc_title.html

National Archives of Australia.
Archiving web resources - policy (revised January, 2001)
www.naa.gov.au/recordkeeping/er/web_records/policy
Archiving web resources - guidelines (March 2001)
www.naa.gov.au/recordkeeping/er/web_records/guide

55

Bibliography

McGill and University of Toronto sites:

• McGill University Web Communications Group Policies
  www.mcgill.ca/administration/vpist/web/wcg/goals/
  
  
• University of Toronto Web Publishing Guidelines
  www.library.utoronto.ca/webguide.htm
  
  
• University of Toronto Guidelines for Archiving Web Sites
  www.library.utoronto.ca/utarms/preservation

56

Questions?

Johanne Pelletier Johanne.Pelletier@mcgill.ca

Garron Wells Garron.Wells@utoronto.ca

57