MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4390418165 · doi:10.17723/2327-9702-86.2.664

Born-Digital Design Records

2023· article· en· W4390418165 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe American Archivist · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEarth and Planetary Sciences
Thématique3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésArchivistResource (disambiguation)Computer scienceScholarshipArchitectureDigital scholarshipWorld Wide WebLibrary scienceHistoryLawPolitical scienceArchaeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In Born-Digital Design Records, edited by Samantha Winn, archival practitioners from across the design records landscape come together to provide a new, much-needed resource: an in-depth overview of the management of born-digital design records presented in three modules.Winn knows from experience the singular difficulties posed by these records, having served from 2014 to 2020 as the collections archivist for Virginia Tech's International Archives of Women in Architecture. The collections that document the work of the design disciplines, including architecture, engineering, landscape architecture, and construction, have always proved challenging for archivists to manage due to their specificity and unique physical characteristics. But the records generated by computer-aided design exist at a unique intersection of obstacles. Even as the set of digital tools used by designers have become more standardized, the records require a steep learning curve to navigate, contain interlinking dependencies with other files, and are often created with expensive, proprietary software.Like many who face this distinct set of hurdles and the lack of resources that address them, Winn looked to professional networks for guidance. This led her to the Society of American Archivists’ (SAA) Design Records Section (DRS), for which she eventually served a term as co-chair. Born-Digital Design Records was conceptualized during her tenure, responding to a call at the 2015 DRS annual meeting for “a new way of scholarship to document the advancements in archival practice regarding records of the built environment” (p. 1).While reading Born-Digital Design Records, one cannot help but notice the frequent invocation of “complex” as a descriptor: for the design process, the management of collections documenting the built environment, and the born-digital design record itself. This repeated description will not surprise anyone who works with design records, but it does make the book's clear and comprehensive overview of the digital preservation of design records all the more impressive. The first module, “Navigating the Technical Landscape of Born-Digital Design Records” by Kristine Fallon, Aliza Leventhal, and Zach Vowell, tackles this complexity head-on by providing an overview of the design process, the types of files produced by designers, and those files’ implications for collections management. The authors’ summary is enriched by discussions with digital design records creators and snapshots of the standard folder structure used by two design firms to organize their project files. The module is accompanied by a glossary, which is indispensable for archival professionals who find themselves suddenly navigating the jargon-heavy world of architecture. It will certainly become a foundational text for those new to working with these types of collections.The remaining two modules provide a practical overview of recent work done by a diverse set of practitioners tasked with digital preservation of architectural records. “Emerging Best Practices in the Accession, Preservation, and Emulation of Born-Digital Design Materials” by Leventhal, with Jody Thompson, Euan Cochrane, Laura Schroffel, and Emily Vigor, explores the workflows and suite of tools that archivists in a variety of contexts have developed and used to manage born-digital design collections. These range from emerging and promising technologies, like Emulation-as-a-Service, to standard archival documents, like deeds of gift, adapted to the needs of born-digital design records. At every step within their workflows for accessioning, processing, and providing access, the authors clearly articulate the specific dynamics raised by design records. At the same time, they do not disregard the wisdom of the larger digital preservation community: their recommended best practices reference established digital archiving standards and are contextualized within the framework of ISO's Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System and the National Digital Stewardship Alliance's Levels of Digital Preservation.1In the final module, “Case Studies in Born-Digital Design Records,” Leventhal and Vowell are joined by Stefana Breitwieser, Alexandra Jokinen, and Mireille Nappert to provide a window into how digital preservation of design records looks in practice from within three different settings: the university archives at California Polytechnic State University, a museum's research collections at the Canadian Centre for Architecture, and a corporate archives at the interdisciplinary design firm Sasaki. Because of the complex and diverse nature of born-digital design records, the conversation surrounding them can often feel abstract and intimidating. This module smartly sets a different tone by striking a balance of broadly applicable guidance and practical, specific examples. I appreciated that the authors grounded their analysis in descriptions of the workflows being implemented at their institutions, including screenshots to illustrate what they described. The authors also share the specific hardware and software used in their collections management activities and are generous in sharing the hiccups they encountered and the often “muddy” process of working through them.If any aspect of Born-Digital Design Records disappoints, it is its timeliness. SAA's Trends in Archives Practice series explicitly aims to provide “on trend” guidance “relating to the practical management of archives.” According to Winn's introduction, work on this volume was initiated in 2017, the year that I began working with design records. I can only imagine what a useful resource this would have been for me in the early years of my career. While these modules still fill the gap of available guidance six years later, I know from my position within the field that digital design practices continue to evolve. Building a proportionately responsive literature is an important part of equipping our professional community to address these ever-shifting challenges. As Winn writes in the introduction, “significant opportunity remains for future research…. The community still needs viable preservation frameworks that can be implemented at scale” (p. 9).Even so, this publication is attuned to the work that it is building upon and the work still left to do. For decades, born-digital design records found their way into archives occasionally. They are now the primary records that document our built environment and make up the bulk of design collections accessioned to repositories of all types. Taken as a whole, Born-Digital Design Records is a testament to the incredible work of the archival professionals who have been the vanguard of that shift from physical to digital, almost always with limited investment and resources. Although all three modules are concerned with the technical aspects of born-digital design records management, the authors recognize that such management is not merely a problem of technology and emphasize the vital role of engagement and relationship building with records creators, donors, and users of these collections.We still do not know what at-scale management of collections in the age of computer-aided design will look like. But the challenges of managing these records are too complex, multilayered, and varied to be solved by one perspective. Born-Digital Design Records is a necessary synthesis of multiple viewpoints that can be the foundation of our profession's contribution to future conversations, as well as an essential resource for those working with these records now.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,943
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,997

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,035
Tête enseignante GPT0,237
Écart entre enseignants0,202 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle