Digital artifactual value


Digital artifactual value, a preservation term, is the intrinsic value of a digital object, rather than the informational content of the object. Though standards are lacking, born-digital objects and digital representations of physical objects may have a value attributed to them as artifacts.

Intrinsic value in analog materials

With respect to analog or non-digital materials, artifacts are determined to have singular research or archival value if they possess qualities and characteristics that make them the only acceptable form for long-term preservation. These qualities and characteristics are commonly referred to as the item's intrinsic value and form the basis upon which digital artifactual value is currently evaluated. Artifactual value based on this idea is predicated upon the artifact's originality, faithfulness, fixity, and stability. The intrinsic value of a particular object, as interpreted by archival professionals, largely determines the selection process for archives. The National Archives and Records Administration Committee on Intrinsic Value in "Intrinsic Value in Archival Material" classified an analog object as having intrinsic value if it possessed one or more of the follow qualities:
  1. Physical form that may be the subject for study if the records provide meaningful documentation or significant examples of the form.
  2. Aesthetic or artistic quality.
  3. Unique or curious physical features.
  4. Age that provides a quality of uniqueness.
  5. Value for use in exhibits.
  6. Questionable authenticity, date, author, or other characteristic that is significant and ascertainable by physical examination.
  7. General and substantial public interest because of direct association with famous or historically significant people, places, things, issues or events.
  8. Significance as documentation of the establishment or continuing legal basis of an agency or institution.
  9. Significance as documentation of the formulation of policy at the highest executive levels when the policy has significance and broad effect throughout or beyond the agency or institution.
Other archival professionals such as Lynn Westney have written that the characteristics of materials exhibiting intrinsic value include age, content, usage, particularities of creation, signatures, and attached seals. Westney and others have stated that paper-based artifacts can be thought to have evidentiary value, or significant contextual markings, insofar that the original manifestation of the artifact can attest to the originality, faithfulness or authenticity, fixity, and stability of the content.
For other analog materials, properly articulating intrinsic value remains essential for determining artifactual value. Similar to paper-based objects in many respects, artifactual value for images typically takes into account artistic value, age, authorial prestige, significant provenance, and institutional priorities. Analog audio preservation is based upon similar factors, including the cultural value of the item, its historical uniqueness, the estimated longevity of the medium, the current condition of the item, and the state of playback equipment, among other things.

Analog conventions in a digital realm

The standard definition of artifactual value, as it has applied to analog or non-digital materials in the twentieth century, is based upon a set of conventions which do not ordinarily apply to digital objects in toto. The Council on Library and Information Resources has stated that printed texts and other paper-based manuscripts, when considered as objects, are imbued with meaning distilled from a general set of understandings inherent to these conventions:
  1. The object is of a fixed and stable composition/form.
  2. Authorship and intellectual property are a recognizable concept.
  3. Duplication is possible.
  4. Fungibility of informational content.
These conventions are important to consider because they help to describe the physical and even metaphysical relationship between a document's content and its physical manifestation. The underpinnings of this relationship are not identical and do not apply with the same degree of clarity to an immaterial digital realm. The idea of fixity with regard to printed materials, for example, is largely predicated on the notion that an object has been recorded on a relatively stable medium. The physical presence of a print text serves as proof of its authenticity as an object or artifact, as well as its scarcity and uniqueness in relation to other print materials. Variations in the chemical properties and storage conditions of print-based materials, as well as other cultural variables, certainly impact the fixity or stability of print materials, but there is little controversy about determining its fundamental existence or originality.
However, uniqueness in the physical, paper-based sense does not translate to a digital realm in which immaterial objects are subject to theoretically infinite levels of reproduction and dissemination. Born-digital and digital surrogates may or may not look any different from each other on a server, and alterations can be made without explicit notice to the user. These alterations are normally called migration events, or actions taken on the digital object that change the original object's composition. They can enact subtle but fundamental alterations to the original document, thereby compromising its existence as an original object. Furthermore, because the tools used to generate and access digital objects have historically evolved quite rapidly, issues of playback obsolescence, incapability, data loss, and broken pathways to information have changed traditional ideas of fixity and stability. Therefore, artifactual value in a digital realm requires a modified set of generalized standards for determining artifactual originality.
Michael J. Giarlo and Ronald Jantz, only two of many, have posited a list of methods for establishing digital intrinsic value by way of careful metadata generation and records maintenance. In their report, a digital original possesses three key characteristics that distinguishes it from identical copies. These include continuous verification and re-verification of the document's digital signature starting from the date of creation; retaining versions and recordings of all changes to the object in an audit trail; and having the archival master contain the creation date of the digital object. They also reported that originality in digital sources could be verified or produced by the following techniques:
  1. Digital object is given a date-time stamp that's automatically inserted into the METS-XML header upon creation.
  2. Date-time is inserted into archival metadata.
  3. Encapsulation.
  4. Digital signatures.

    The role of digital surrogates

Digital surrogates are considered a utility for aiding in the preservation and increased access of certain artifacts. However, digital surrogates can have different utilities for objects depending on the nature of the original artifact and the condition the artifact is in. In 2001 the Council on Library and Information Resources published a report on the artifact in library collections. The CLIR states that the utility of the digital surrogate can be determined by dividing the original material into two different categories, artifacts that are rare and those that are not. These two categories can be further divided by two categories, artifacts that are frequently used and those that are not.

Materials that are frequently used and not rare

According to the CLIR "it is not obvious that digital surrogates provide all the functionality, all the information, or all the aesthetic value of originals. Therefore, while it may be sensible to recommend that digital surrogates be used to reduce the cost and increase the availability of library holdings that circulate frequently, the decision to deaccession a physical object in library collections and replace it with a digital surrogate should be based on a careful assessment of the way in which library patrons use the original object or objects of its kind."

Materials that are infrequently used and not rare

Keeping the original is always the best solution for libraries and especially archives but in the case of libraries where an artifact is not rare or used infrequently there must be a barometer that is developed to help "balance functionality with actual use in order to help decide when digital surrogates that provide most of the functionality of originals are acceptable."

Materials that are rare and frequently used

A professional in the field of Library and Information Science would almost certainly not argue that a digital surrogate could replace a rare object. However, in the case of a rare object that is falling into poor shape due to heavy use a digital surrogate could be extremely useful in reducing the wear and in the long run aid in preserving the artifact. A digital surrogate is not the ultimate end in preserving artifacts, but are very useful partners in the process.

Materials that are rare and infrequently used

For materials that are rare and infrequently used the idea of making a digital surrogate is often not viewed as a viable option, because digitization is so expensive. However, if the cost of housing the artifact becomes too burdensome making a digital surrogate might become a viable option. In some cases a library might even contemplate to deaccession the artifact once it is digitized. "Here again, libraries need to be aware of the actual or potential rarity of even those materials used infrequently today. Tomorrow, those may very well be the most valuable of artifacts, perhaps for users, or uses, that one could not predict today."

Evidential and intrinsic value of digital surrogates

Probably one of the biggest benefits that are expressed in all categories of digital surrogates is the increased access and potential increase of use due to ease of retrieving the artifact. Even though the digital surrogate might seem like a suitable replacement, the possibility of contextual loss needs to be seriously thought out before the inception of a mass digital surrogate project.
The digital surrogate can aid in preservation and helps increase access but they can lose valuable evidential value. According to Lynn Westney, digital surrogates do not have intrinsic value to make up for potential loss of evidential value. "The major risk posed by digital surrogates is the loss of evidential value due to the destruction of evidence as to the context and circumstances of their origin. Intrinsic value is lost when the testimony of the original is not completely preserved when converted to a different medium. It is based on features whose testimony is dependent on the form of the original and can therefore not be converted." Furthermore, Westney believes that with the increases in technology, and the availability to the public, it is very easy to manipulate and alter digital information and in turn losing the original authentic information perhaps permanently. It is harder to ensure the integrity of digital materials in this modern age. The problem of integrity must be considered when deciding to make digital surrogates or preserving born digital objects as integrity is key component to artifacts.