[Rdap] What makes an 'Archive Quality' Digital Object?

[Michael J. Giarlo]

On 04/26/2011 03:30 PM, Joe Hourcle wrote:
>
>>
>> The first bit I have trouble wrapping my mind around is that the notion
>> of archival quality is binary, that an object can be of archival quality
>> or not.
>
> Maybe I should be asking the opposite --
>
> What would make a digital object *not* of archival quality?

I'd respond the same. :)  I couldn't confidently say whether an object 
is archival or not archival w/o a lot more context along the dimensions 
I mentioned (use, file formats, retention period, etc.), and even then I 
would be inclined not to say it's archival or not but rather give a 
qualified judgment on *how* likely I think that object will be around in 
N years.

> I guess what I'm really looking for is something like TRAC or Data Seal of
> Approval, but instead of guidelines for the repository, focuses on the
> qualities of a good self-documenting file or package that could later be
> ingested by an archive for them to maintain.

Nothing comes to mind, but I'd be interested in hearing examples of the 
same.

I guess this might be a good place to bring up what may be a related 
technology:

"""
Data Format Description Language (DFDL, often pronounced daff-o-dil) is 
a modeling language from the Open Grid Forum for describing general text 
and binary data. A DFDL model or schema allows any text or binary data 
to be read (or "parsed") from its native format and to be presented as 
an instance of an information set. The same DFDL schema also allows data 
to be taken from an instance of an information set and written out (or 
"serialized") to its native format.
""" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Format_Description_Language

I haven't had the occasion to use DFDL -- and I tend to shy away from 
huge blobs of XML and XML Schema -- but it could have some promise in 
this area.  Has anyone else used DFDL or thought about it in the context 
Joe brings up?

Btw, Joe, I appreciate your catalog checklist and the four 
characteristics you shared.  Good starting point.

-Mike