Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Ágora (Florianópolis. Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://agora.emnuvens.com.br/ra/article/view/1016 |
Resumo: | Comparatively analyzes the requirements of the Guidelines for the Implementation of Trusted Digital Archival Repositories, a standard developed by the National Council of Archives, and the criteria of the publication Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist for long-term digital preservation. Using the Comparative Method, the following devices present in both criteria models were investigated: Section/Set, Group, and Requirement. Functionally equivalent criteria were sought to group them based on the similarities with which requirements and criteria address preservation actions. It was observed that the requirements of the Guidelines for Implementation of Trusted Digital Archival Repositories perform preservation actions similar to those prescribed by the Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist criteria. It is concluded that the latter is a viable alternative to assist in the implementation, audit, and certification of archival repositories in the Brazilian context. |
id |
UFSC-20_55b7525de55b0b7891f018cd9885c43f |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.agora.emnuvens.com.br:article/1016 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSC-20 |
network_name_str |
Ágora (Florianópolis. Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC modelPropuesta de mejora del modelo conceptual para Repositorios Archivísticos Digitales de Confianza (RDC-Arq) para auditoría y certificación con base en la comparación con el modelo de criterios Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist (TRAC)Proposta de aperfeiçoamento do modelo conceitual para Repositórios Arquivísticos Digitais Confiáveis (RDC-Arq) para auditoria e certificação a partir da comparação com o modelo de critérios Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist (TRAC)Auditing and Certification of Trusted Repositories: Criteria and Checklist. Long-term digital archival preservation. Audit and certification of trusted digital repositories.Auditoria e certificação de repositórios confiáveis: Critérios e lista de verificação. Preservação arquivística digital no longo prazo. Auditoria e certificação de repositórios digitais confiáveisAuditoría y Certificación de repositorios de confianza: Criterios y lista de verificación. Conservación de archivos digitales a largo plazo. Auditoría y certificación de repositorios digitales confiablesComparatively analyzes the requirements of the Guidelines for the Implementation of Trusted Digital Archival Repositories, a standard developed by the National Council of Archives, and the criteria of the publication Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist for long-term digital preservation. Using the Comparative Method, the following devices present in both criteria models were investigated: Section/Set, Group, and Requirement. Functionally equivalent criteria were sought to group them based on the similarities with which requirements and criteria address preservation actions. It was observed that the requirements of the Guidelines for Implementation of Trusted Digital Archival Repositories perform preservation actions similar to those prescribed by the Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist criteria. It is concluded that the latter is a viable alternative to assist in the implementation, audit, and certification of archival repositories in the Brazilian context.Analiza comparativamente los requisitos de las Directrices para la Implementación de Repositorios de Archivos Digitales de Confianza, una normativa elaborada por el Conselho Nacional de Arquivos, y los criterios de la publicación Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist para la preservación digital a largo plazo. Por medio de la utilización del Método Comparativo, se investigaron los siguientes dispositivos presentes en los modelos de criterios: sección/conjunto, grupo y requisito. Se buscaron criterios funcionalmente equivalentes, para agruparlos en función de las similitudes con las que los requisitos y criterios tratan las acciones de conservación. Se observó que los requisitos de las Directrices para la Implementación de Repositorios de Archivos Digitales de Confianza realizan acciones de preservación similares a las prescritas por los criterios Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist. Se concluye que este último es una alternativa viable para ayudar en la implementación, auditoría y certificación de repositorios archivísticos en el contexto brasileño.Analisa comparativamente os requisitos das Diretrizes para Implementação de Repositórios Arquivísticos Digitais Confiáveis, normativa elaborada pelo Conselho Nacional de Arquivos, e os critérios da publicação Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist para preservação digital no longo prazo. Utilizando o Método Comparativo, investigaram-se os seguintes dispositivos presentes em ambos os modelos de critérios: seção/conjunto, grupo e requisito. Buscaram-se critérios funcionalmente equivalentes, de forma a agrupá-los baseando-se nas semelhanças com que requisitos e critérios tratam as ações de preservação. Observou-se que os requisitos das Diretrizes para Implementação de Repositórios Arquivísticos Digitais Confiáveis desempenham ações de preservação semelhantes às prescritas pelos critérios Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist. Conclui-se que este último é uma alternativa viável para auxiliar na implantação, auditoria e certificação de repositórios arquivísticos no contexto brasileiro.CIN - CED - UFSC2021-08-11info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpalavras chavesapplication/pdfhttps://agora.emnuvens.com.br/ra/article/view/1016ÁGORA: Arquivologia em debate; Vol. 31 No. 63 (2021); 1-19ÁGORA: Arquivologia em debate; v. 31 n. 63 (2021); 1-192763-90450103-3557reponame:Ágora (Florianópolis. Online)instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCporhttps://agora.emnuvens.com.br/ra/article/view/1016/975http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAndrade, Fábio Lopes deChagas, Cintia Aparecida2021-07-01T15:00:25Zoai:ojs.agora.emnuvens.com.br:article/1016Revistahttps://agora.emnuvens.com.br/raPUBhttps://agora.emnuvens.com.br/ra/oairevista.agora@contato.ufsc.br||ursula.blattmann@ufsc.br2763-90450103-3557opendoar:2021-07-01T15:00:25Ágora (Florianópolis. Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model Propuesta de mejora del modelo conceptual para Repositorios Archivísticos Digitales de Confianza (RDC-Arq) para auditoría y certificación con base en la comparación con el modelo de criterios Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist (TRAC) Proposta de aperfeiçoamento do modelo conceitual para Repositórios Arquivísticos Digitais Confiáveis (RDC-Arq) para auditoria e certificação a partir da comparação com o modelo de critérios Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist (TRAC) |
title |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model |
spellingShingle |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model Andrade, Fábio Lopes de Auditing and Certification of Trusted Repositories: Criteria and Checklist. Long-term digital archival preservation. Audit and certification of trusted digital repositories. Auditoria e certificação de repositórios confiáveis: Critérios e lista de verificação. Preservação arquivística digital no longo prazo. Auditoria e certificação de repositórios digitais confiáveis Auditoría y Certificación de repositorios de confianza: Criterios y lista de verificación. Conservación de archivos digitales a largo plazo. Auditoría y certificación de repositorios digitales confiables |
title_short |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model |
title_full |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model |
title_fullStr |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model |
title_full_unstemmed |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model |
title_sort |
Proposal for improvement of the RDC-Arq model and certification for trusted digital archival repositories based on comparison with the TRAC model |
author |
Andrade, Fábio Lopes de |
author_facet |
Andrade, Fábio Lopes de Chagas, Cintia Aparecida |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Chagas, Cintia Aparecida |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Andrade, Fábio Lopes de Chagas, Cintia Aparecida |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Auditing and Certification of Trusted Repositories: Criteria and Checklist. Long-term digital archival preservation. Audit and certification of trusted digital repositories. Auditoria e certificação de repositórios confiáveis: Critérios e lista de verificação. Preservação arquivística digital no longo prazo. Auditoria e certificação de repositórios digitais confiáveis Auditoría y Certificación de repositorios de confianza: Criterios y lista de verificación. Conservación de archivos digitales a largo plazo. Auditoría y certificación de repositorios digitales confiables |
topic |
Auditing and Certification of Trusted Repositories: Criteria and Checklist. Long-term digital archival preservation. Audit and certification of trusted digital repositories. Auditoria e certificação de repositórios confiáveis: Critérios e lista de verificação. Preservação arquivística digital no longo prazo. Auditoria e certificação de repositórios digitais confiáveis Auditoría y Certificación de repositorios de confianza: Criterios y lista de verificación. Conservación de archivos digitales a largo plazo. Auditoría y certificación de repositorios digitales confiables |
description |
Comparatively analyzes the requirements of the Guidelines for the Implementation of Trusted Digital Archival Repositories, a standard developed by the National Council of Archives, and the criteria of the publication Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist for long-term digital preservation. Using the Comparative Method, the following devices present in both criteria models were investigated: Section/Set, Group, and Requirement. Functionally equivalent criteria were sought to group them based on the similarities with which requirements and criteria address preservation actions. It was observed that the requirements of the Guidelines for Implementation of Trusted Digital Archival Repositories perform preservation actions similar to those prescribed by the Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist criteria. It is concluded that the latter is a viable alternative to assist in the implementation, audit, and certification of archival repositories in the Brazilian context. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-08-11 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion palavras chaves |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://agora.emnuvens.com.br/ra/article/view/1016 |
url |
https://agora.emnuvens.com.br/ra/article/view/1016 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://agora.emnuvens.com.br/ra/article/view/1016/975 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
CIN - CED - UFSC |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
CIN - CED - UFSC |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
ÁGORA: Arquivologia em debate; Vol. 31 No. 63 (2021); 1-19 ÁGORA: Arquivologia em debate; v. 31 n. 63 (2021); 1-19 2763-9045 0103-3557 reponame:Ágora (Florianópolis. Online) instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) instacron:UFSC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
instacron_str |
UFSC |
institution |
UFSC |
reponame_str |
Ágora (Florianópolis. Online) |
collection |
Ágora (Florianópolis. Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Ágora (Florianópolis. Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revista.agora@contato.ufsc.br||ursula.blattmann@ufsc.br |
_version_ |
1789435164138405888 |