The ZBW has been operating a Digital Archive since 2015 and experience has shown that the success rate has been very bad in the past, when asking for replacement more than a few weeks after acquisition of the data. If corrupted objects are detected so late, it’s usually too late so ask for a replacement. There can be months, sometimes years, between acquisition and the ingest into the Archive. The longterm-archiving is last in the object processing pipeline. It’s necessary to check for completeness and integrity, of course, which takes some time. The colleagues from the responsible acquisition team get the content (usually PDF files) in large ZIP-Files.

We are allowed to host and to ingest into the Digital Archive, but usually this goes very slowly. I pick one example for this blogpost: The national and alliance licences. What if it’s much slower?īut there are other platforms, other departments which acquire digital content and not everything is ingested the night after data acquisition. We can give a feedback the next day and our workmates can ask the data producer for a replacement.Īs this check is done directly after the acquisition, the data producer usually is easy to reach and a replacement is easily on the way. If a PDF (EconStor usually hosts PDF files) is broken, our tools notice that. Of course we do all the mandatory checking, including format check, validation checks and extraction of metadata.

As this is all automated, it literally happens during our sleep. They put the digital content on their digital preservation platforms, for example the Open Access Repository EconStor, and we archive during the next night. What’s the opposite of collateral damage? Collateral use? That’s what our Digital Preservation workflows are for some other departments in our library. Collateral use of Digital Preservation for other departments

Exiftool help