• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.45-65
• /
• 2022

YouTube videos of public institutions are digital public records that need to be managed and preserved. As such, the video and the metadata describing the video should also be preserved. This study aims to select the key metadata elements necessary for archiving videos published on YouTube by public institutions. To this end, five high-level areas, namely the description, structure, management, preservation, and user participation, and the metadata elements of 10 subareas, were designed by referring to NAK 8, PREMIS, ISAD(G), and YouTube metadata. Afterward, the metadata elements designed by 14 experts were verified. Lastly, the validity and reliability of the evaluation results were verified. Of the 63 elements, 33 satisfied the validity and reliability criteria. Thus, these elements were selected as the core metadata for archiving YouTube videos in public institutions.

• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.69-92
• /
• 2003

Registration and description of records are important elements of processing which provide with the background information of production of records and business-related information. They also enable to search and use the records. In this paper, I examined the Korean registration and description system defined in the Public Records Management Act which directs the records creating agency to register records in creating offices and directs the "professional archives" to make "basic registrations" and "detailed registrations" of the records. In the analysis and comparison of two different registration and description systems with the known international standards of records and archives management, such as ISO15489 and ISAD(G), I intended to evaluate the Korean records and archives management system and suggested recommendations for the renovation of the Korean recordskeeping system. Despite we have unique office business procedures and the culture of officialdom, and despite we have developed our system based on the established business procedures and office culture, it would be preferable to adopt or follow the international standards and established best practices. After the comparative analysis, I recommended some innovations in the filed of registration and description. For instance, in the basic registration. we would better to install an item of "simple contents summary." We may also need the multiple-level description. The fonds level description and the series level description should be introduced to our archival automated management system. We need to establish a Korean standard of description adopting the rules of the ISAD(G) and ISAAR(CPF). Essential requirements for electronic records management, such as contextual and structural information, should be incorporated in the new standard. Documentation of records disposition also should be reinforced to guarantee the authenticity of records and to ensure control of the records. To implement the recommendations for the standard, we need to amend the Public Records Management Act and its Regulations and Rules. Also it is imperative to redesign the GARS integrated archival automated management system.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.8
• /
• pp.181-211
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study is to reveal the context within which EAD was developed, to review the elements and the structure of EAD 1.0 version and to introduce EAD as new standard for encoded archival finding aids in Korea. Encoded Archival Description(EAD) has been developed in 1993 in order to facilitate exchange of ISAD(G) descriptive information. EAD is currently administered and maintained jointly by the Society of American Archivists and the United States Library of Congress. While development was initiated in the United Stares, international interest and contribution are increasing. EAD is a encoding standard designed specifically for marking up information contained in archival finding aids. From its inception, EAD was based on SGML, and, with the release of EAD version 1.0 in 1998, it is also compliant with XML in order to facilitate easier internet access to SGML-encoded finding aids. EAD is the first tool to preserve the multilevel and hierarchical description manifest in finding aids by providing structures in which to describe entire record collections and increasingly smaller subcomponents thereof such as series, subseries, folders, and even items. Archival institutions can form a EAD consortium and also create a union database of EAD finding aids for the geographically dispersed collections. The EAD DTD provides a flexible way for archives to convert finding aids that exist in paper form into electronic documents or to create new finding aids in electronic form.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.47
• /
• pp.5-49
• /
• 2016

Compared with public archives, personal archives are likely to disappear if creators don't preserve and manage them. So personal archives must be managed by oneself. But it's difficult to manage their archives systematically for people who don't have the expertise in archival science. Besides, there are not enough available informations. So this thesis suggests how to manage personal archives by two steps. First step is figuring out one's own archives through analyzing one's life by top-down approach and organizing them into collection. Second step is conducting archival appraisal by three steps and establishing classification schemes, describing them. Especially, this study adduce description elements using ISAD(G) for personal archives. this study also recommends using blogs on portal to manage one's archives easily. But they don't have the audit train and exporting function. So this thesis emphasizes the necessity of 'customized archive blogs'. At conclusion, this study highlights the necessity of developing education programs and manuals for people who are trying to manage one's own archives.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.127-176
• /
• 2012

Metadata is well recognized as one of the foundational factors in archiving and long-term preservation of digital resources. There are several metadata standards for records management, archives and preservation, e.g. ISAD(G), EAD, AGRkMs, PREMIS, and OAIS. Consideration is important in selecting appropriate metadata standards in order to design metadata schema that meet the requirements of a particular archival system. Interoperability of metadata with other systems should be considered in schema design. In our previous research, we have presented a feature analysis of metadata standards by identifying the primary resource lifecycle stages where each standard is applied. We have clarified that any single metadata standard cannot cover the whole records lifecycle for archiving and preservation. Through this feature analysis, we analyzed the features of metadata in the whole records lifecycle, and we clarified the relationships between the metadata standards and the stages of the lifecycle. In the previous study, more detailed analysis was left for future study. This paper proposes to analyze the metadata schemas from the viewpoint of tasks performed in the lifecycle. Metadata schemas are primarily defined to describe properties of a resource in accordance with the purposes of description, e.g. finding aids, records management, preservation and so forth. In other words, the metadata standards are resource- and purpose-centric, and the resource lifecycle is not explicitly reflected in the standards. There are no systematic methods for mapping between different metadata standards in accordance with the lifecycle. This paper proposes a method for mapping between metadata standards based on the tasks contained in the resource lifecycle. We first propose a Task Model to clarify tasks applied to resources in each stage of the lifecycle. This model is created as a task-centric model to identify features of metadata standards and to create mappings among elements of those standards. It is important to categorize the elements in order to limit the semantic scope of mapping among elements and decrease the number of combinations of elements for mapping. This paper proposes to use 5W1H (Who, What, Why, When, Where, How) model to categorize the elements. 5W1H categories are generally used for describing events, e.g. news articles. As performing a task on a resource causes an event and metadata elements are used in the event, we consider that the 5W1H categories are adequate to categorize the elements. By using these categories, we determine the features of every element of metadata standards which are AGLS, AGRkMS, PREMIS, EAD, OAIS and an attribute set extracted from DPC decision flow. Then, we perform the element mapping between the standards, and find the relationships between the standards. In this study, we defined a set of terms for each of 5W1H categories, which typically appear in the definition of an element, and used those terms to categorize the elements. For example, if the definition of an element includes the terms such as person and organization that mean a subject which contribute to create, modify a resource the element is categorized into the Who category. A single element can be categorized into one or more 5W1H categories. Thus, we categorized every element of the metadata standards using the 5W1H model, and then, we carried out mapping among the elements in each category. We conclude that the Task Model provides a new viewpoint for metadata schemas and is useful to help us understand the features of metadata standards for records management and archives. The 5W1H model, which is defined based on the Task Model, provides us a core set of categories to semantically classify metadata elements from the viewpoint of an event caused by a task.