1
Theimer K, editor. Appraisal and acquisition: innovative practices for archives and special collections. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield 2015.
2
Roe K. Arranging & describing archives & manuscripts. Chicago: Society of American Archivists 2005.
3
Theimer K, editor. Description. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield 2014.
4
International Council on Archives. International Council on Archives code of ethics. 1996.
5
International Council on Archives. ISAD(G): General international standard archival description. 2000.
6
Williams C. Managing archives: foundations, principles and practice. Oxford: Chandos 2006.
7
Robyns MC. Using functional analysis in archival appraisal: a practical and effective alternative to traditional appraisal methodologies. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield 2014.
8
Jenkinson H. A manual of archive administration. 2nd ed. reprinted. London: Lund, Humphries 1965.
9
Arts Council England. Acceptance in Lieu. https://www.artscouncil.org.uk/tax-incentives/acceptance-lieu
10
The National Archives. Applying for Grant Aid. 2004.
11
The National Archives. Archive Collection Policy Statements: Checklist of Suggested Contents. 2004.
12
Abraham T. Collection policy or documentation strategy: theory and practice. American Archivist. 1991;54.
13
Kitching C, Hart I. Collection policy statements. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 1995;16:7–14. doi: 10.1080/00379819509511756
14
Cultural Gifts Scheme and Acceptance in Lieu - report 2021. 2021.
15
Abraham T. Documentary Strategies: A Decade (or More) Later. 1995. http://webpages.uidaho.edu/special-collections/papers/docstr10.htm
16
Department for Digital, Culture Media & Sport. Export of Objects of Cultural Interest 2018-19 and 2019-20. 2021.
17
Arts Council England. Export licensing. http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/what-we-do/supporting-museums/cultural-property/export-controls/export-licensing/
18
Goodison N. Goodison Review securing the best for our museums: Private giving and Government support. 2004.
19
The National Archives. Loan (deposit) agreements for privately owned archives. 2006.
20
Tullock J, Alexandra C. Logjam: an audit of uncatalogued collections in the North West. 2004.
21
Sims RMC. Obligations and aftercare: the depositor and service standard agreements. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2003;24:215–21. doi: 10.1080/0037981032000127061
22
Arts Council England. Reviewing committee. https://www.artscouncil.org.uk/supporting-collections-and-cultural-property/reviewing-committee
23
The National Archives. Surveying historical manuscripts: some guidelines. 2006.
24
HM Government. Tax relief for national heritage assets - Detailed guidance. 2013. https://www.gov.uk/tax-relief-for-national-heritage-assets
25
Hackman LJ, Warnow-Blewett J. The documentation strategy process: a model and a case study. American Archivist. 1987;50:12–47.
26
Dicken J. Twentieth century literary archives: Collecting policies and research initiatives. New directions in archival research. Liverpool: Liverpool University Centre for Archive Studies 2000.
27
Helen Willa Samuels. Who controls the past. American Archivist. 1986;49.
28
Tschan RA. A comparison of Jenkinson and Schellenberg on appraisal. American Archivist. 2002;65.
29
Larkin P. A neglected responsibility: contemporary literary manuscripts. Required writing: miscellaneous pieces 1955-1982. London: Faber 1983.
30
The National Archives. Acquisition and disposition strategy. 2007.
31
Cook, Terry. Appraisal methodology: Macro appraisal and functional analysis. Part A: Concept and theory. 2000.
32
Menne-Haritz A. Appraisal or documentation: Can we appraise archives by selecting content? American Archivist. 1994;57.
33
The National Archives. Appraisal policy. 2012.
34
The National Archives. Appraisal toolkits.
35
Baerlett, N. Appraising university records: A retrospective analysis. 2001.
36
Reed B. Archival appraisal. Keeping archives. Port Melbourne: Thorpe in association with the Australian Society of Archivists 1993.
37
Boles F, Young JM. Archival appraisal. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers 1991.
38
Couture C. Archival appraisal, a status report. Archivaria. 1995;59.
39
Craig BL, Thomson Gale (Firm). Archival appraisal: theory and practice. München, Germany: K.G. Saur 2004.
40
Ham FG. Archival choices: Managing the historical record in an age of abundance. American Archivist. 1984;47.
41
Brichford MJ, Society of American Archivists. Archives and manuscripts: appraisal and accessioning. Chicago: Society of Archivists 1977.
42
Jimerson R. Archives and manuscripts: deciding what to save. OCLC Systems & Services. 2003;19.
43
Walters TO. Contemporary archival appraisal methods and preservation decision-making. American Archivist. 1996;59.
44
Pearce N. Deciding what to save: Fifty years of theory and practice. Archival choices: managing the historical record in an age of abundance. Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books 1984:1–18.
45
Harvey, Ross. Digital curation manual instalment on appraisal and selection. 2007.
46
Abraham, Terry. Documentation strategies: A decade (or more) later. 1995.
47
Greene MA, Daniels-Howell TJ. Documentation with an attitude: A pragmatist’s guide to the selection and acquisition to modern business records. The records of American business. Chicago: Society of American Archivists 1997.
48
Jimerson R. Embracing the power of archives. The American Archivist. 2006;69.
49
Boles, F., Greene, M.A. Et tu Schellenberg? Thoughts on the dagger of American appraisal theory. American Archivist. 1996;59.
50
Doylen, Michael. Experiments in deaccessioning: Archives and online auctions. American Archivist. 2001;64.
51
Boles, F. Exploring the black box: The appraisal of university administrative records. American Archivist. 1985;48.
52
Bailey, C. From top down: The practice of macro-appraisal. Archivaria. 1997;43.
53
Whyte, Angus, Wilson, Andrew. How to appraise and select research data for curation. 2010.
54
Benedict, K. Invitation to a bonfire: Reappraisal and de-accessioning of records as collection management tools in an Archives – A reply to Leonard Rapport. American Archivist. 1984;47.
55
Stapleton, R. Jenkinson and Schellenberg: a comparison. Archivaria. 1983;17.
56
Cook, Terry. Macro-appraisal and functional analysis: documenting governance rather than government. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2004;25.
57
Brown, R. Macro-appraisal theory and the context of the public records creator. Archivaria. 1995;40.
58
Cook, Terry. Macroappraisal in theory and practice: Origins, characteristics and implementation in Canada, 1950-2000. Archival Science. 2005;4.
59
Boles, F. Mix two parts interest to one part information and appraise until done: Understanding contemporary record selection processes. American Archivist. 1987;50.
60
Schellenberg TR. Modern archives: principles and techniques. Chicago: Society of American Archivists 2003.
61
Jenkinson H. Modern archives. Some reflections on T R Schellenberg. 1980.
62
Cox RJ. No innocent deposits: forming archives by rethinking appraisal. Lanham, Md: Scarecrow Press 2004.
63
The National Archives. Operational selection policies.
64
Ide, M., Weisse, L. Recommended appraisal guidelines for selecting born digital master programs for preservation and deposit with the Library of Congress. 2006.
65
Eastwood, T. Reflections on the goal of archival appraisal in democratic societies. Archivaria. 2002;54.
66
Booms, Hans. Society and the formation of a documentary heritage: Issues in the appraisal of archival sources. Archivaria. 1987;24.
67
Williams, Caroline. Studying reality: the application of theory in an aspect of UK practice. Archivaria. 2006;62.
68
Jenkinson H. The choice of records for preservation in wartime: some practical hints. Selected writings of Sir Hilary Jenkinson. 1980.
69
Mercer, H. The National Archives appraisal policy: Background paper – the Grigg system and beyond. 2004.
70
Schellenberg, T.R. The appraisal of modern public records. National Archives bulletin 8. 1956.
71
Duranti, Luciana. The concept of appraisal and archival theory. American Archivist. 1994;57.
72
Hackman, L.J. The documentation strategy process: A model and a case study. American Archivist. 1987;50.
73
Cox, R.J. The end of collecting: Towards a new purpose for archival appraisal. Archival Science. 2002;2.
74
Bearman, D., Lytle, R. The power and principle of provenance. Archivaria. 1985;21.
75
Day M. The selection, appraisal and retention of digital scientific data: the ERPANET / CODATA workshop. Ariadne. Published Online First: 2004.
76
Hull, F. The use of sampling techniques in the retention of records: A RAMP study with guidelines. 1981.
77
Foote, K.E. To remember and forget: Archives, memory, and culture. American Archivist. 1990;53.
78
Cook T. We are what we keep: We keep what we are: Archival appraisal past, present and future. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2011;32.
79
Cook T. What is past is prologue: A history of archival ideas since 1898 and the future paradigm shift. Archivaria. 1997;43.
80
Samuels, H.W. Who controls the past. American Archivist. 1986;49.
81
Momryk, Myron. "National significance ”: The evolution and development of acquisition strategies in the manuscript division , National Archives of Canada. Archivaria: the Journal of the Association of Canadian Archivists. 2001;52.
82
Yakel, Elizabeth. Archival representation. Archival Science. 2003;3.
83
Cook T. Archival science and postmodernism: New formulations for old concepts. Archival Science. 2000;1.
84
Nesmith T, Society of American Archivists, Association of Canadian Archivists. Archival studies in English-speaking Canada and the North American rediscovery of provenance. Canadian archival studies and the rediscovery of provenance. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press 1993.
85
Scott, Peter J, Finlay, G. Archives and Administrative Change: Some Methods and Approaches (Part I). Archives and Manuscripts. 1978;7.
86
Cook, Terry, Schwartz, Joan M. Archives, records and power: From (postmodern) theory to (archival) performance. Archival Science. 2002;2.
87
Miller FM. Arranging and describing archives and manuscripts. Chicago: Society of American Archivists 1990.
88
Goldman R. Derangement and Description: A chaotic little archives webcomic. https://derangementanddescription.wordpress.com/
89
Boles, F. Disrespecting original order. American Archivist. 1982;45.
90
Cook, Terry. Fashionable nonsense or professional rebirth: Postmodernism and the practice of archives. Archivaria. 2001;51.
91
Clanchy MT. From memory to written record: England 1066-1307. 3rd ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell 2013.
92
Meehan J. Making the Leap from Parts to Whole: Evidence and Inference in Archival Arrangement and Description. American Archivist. 2009;72.
93
Muller S, Feith JA, Fruin R. Manual for the arrangement and description of archives. 2nd ed. New York: Wilson 1968.
94
Schellenberg TR. Modern archives: principles and techniques. Chicago: Society of American Archivists 2003.
95
Anchor R. ‘More product less process’: method, madness or practice? Archives & Records. 2013;34.
96
Brothman, Brien. Orders of value: Probing the theoretical terms of archival practice. Archivaria. 1991;32.
97
Macneil, Heather. Picking our text: Archival description, authenticity, and the archivist as editor. American Archivist. 2005;68.
98
Dwiggins DM. Putting the ‘Where’ in the Archives: Internet Mapping and Archival Records. Library Student Journal. 2010. http://web.archive.org/web/20130411082237/http://www.librarystudentjournal.org/index.php/lsj/article/view/112/275
99
Parker, Elizabeth. Records life cycle structure study. 2002.
100
Wells E. Related Material – The Arrangement and Description of Family Papers. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2012;33:167–84. doi: 10.1080/00379816.2012.722528
101
Duff W, Harris V. Stories and names: Archival description as narrating records and constructing meanings. Archival Science. 2002;2.
102
Cook T. The concept of the archival fonds in the post-custodial era: Theory, problems and solutions. Archivaria. 1993;35.
103
Millar, Laura. The death of the fonds and the resurrection of provenance: Archival context in space and time. Archivaria. 2002;53.
104
Horsman, Peter. The last dance of the phoenix, or the re-discovery of the archival fonds. Archivaria. 2002;54.
105
Hurley C. The making and keeping of records: (1) What are finding aids for. Archives and Manuscripts. 1998;26.
106
Duranti L. Origin and development of the concept of description. Archivaria. 1993;35.
107
Bearman D, Lytle R. The power and principle of provenance. Archivaria. 1985;21.
108
Scott PJ. The record group concept: A case for abandonment. American Archivist. 1966;29.
109
International Dunhuang Project. The Silk Road online.
110
Duchein, Michel. Theoretical principles and practical problems of respect des fonds in archival science. Archivaria. 1983;16.
111
Cook, Terry. What is past is prologue: A history of archival ideas since 1898 and the future paradigm shift. Archivaria. 1997;43.
112
Beattie, Heather. Where narratives meet: Archival description, provenance, and women’s diaries. Libraries and the Cultural Record. 2009;44.
113
Kaplan, Deborah, Sauer, Anne, Wilczek, Eliot. Archival description in OAI-ORE. Journal of Digital Information. 2011;12.
114
Yakel, Elizabeth. Archival representation. Archival Science. 2003;3.
115
Hensen SL. Archives, personal papers, and manuscripts: a cataloging manual for archival repositories, historical societies, and manuscript libraries. Washington, D.C.: [Manuscript Division, Library of Congress] 1983.
116
Miller FM. Arranging and describing archives and manuscripts. Chicago: Society of American Archivists 1990.
117
O’Brien, Jeff. Basic RAD: A short introduction. 1997.
118
Weber LB. Record Formatting: MARC AMC. Describing Archival Materials: The Use of the Marc AMC Format. Routledge 1990.
119
Australian Society of Archivists. Committee on Descriptive Standards. Describing archives in context: a guide to Australian practice. [S.l.]: Australian Society of Archivists, Committee on Descriptive Standards 2005.
120
Peters V. Developing archival context standards for functions in the higher education sector. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2005;26.
121
Bunn J. Developing descriptive standards: a renewed call to action. Archives and Records. 2013;34.
122
EAD Working Group. Development of the encoded archival description DTD. 1998.
123
van Ballegooie M, Duff W. Digital Curation Manual: Instalment on archival metadata. 2006.
124
Technical Subcommittee on Encoded Archival Description. EAD revision. 2013.
125
Goss S. Facilitating access to archival material: The creation of EAD records for the online archive of California. PNLA Quarterly. 2013;77.
126
Gateway to Archives of Scottish Higher Education (GASHE). GASHE standard for creating activity descriptions. 2006.
127
Archives and Records Association. Guide to standards.
128
Stevenson, A, Stevenson, J. Lifting the lid on linked data: Linked data and the LOCAH project. 2011.
129
Hooland S van, Verborgh R. Linked data for libraries, archives and museums: how to clean, link and publish your metadata. London: Facet Publishing 2014.
130
Shepherd, Elizabeth, Pringle, R. Mapping descriptive standards across domains: A comparison of ISAD(G) and SPECTRUM. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2002;23.
131
Procter M, Cook M. Manual of archival description. Third edition. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge 2016.
132
Anarchivist. My Journey With Encoded Archival Description. 14 AD.
133
Yeo, Geoffrey. New approaches to archival description Standards for archival description " The need for descriptive standards is no longer a subject for debate ”. 2008.
134
Walch, V. I. Standards for archival description: A handbook. 1994.
135
The Society of American Archivists. Statement of principles for the CUSTARD Project.
136
Ruch A. Supporting interoperability of distributed archives using authority controlled ontologies.
137
Shepherd, Elizabeth, Smith, C. The application of ISAD(G) to the description of archival datasets. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2000;21.
138
Hurley C. The Australian (‘series’) system: An exposition. The Records Continuum: Ian Maclean and Australian Archives First Fifty Years: Ian Maclean’s and Australian Archives First Fifty Years. Parkes: National Archives of Australia .
139
Caswell M. Using classification to convict the Khmer Rouge. Journal of Documentation. 2012;68:162–84. doi: 10.1108/00220411211209177
140
Zhang J, Mauney D. When archival description meets digital object metadata: A typological study of digital archival representation. The American Archivist. 2013;76.
141
Mortimer, I. ARCHON and the indexes to the National Register of Archives: Past, present and future. Program: Electronic Libraries and Information Systems. 1999;33.
142
N2T. Archival resource key (ARK) identifiers.
143
Getty Research Institute. Art and architecture thesaurus online. 2000.
144
W3C. Date and time formats. 1997.
145
Local Government Association. Integrated public sector vocabulary.
146
International Council on Archives. ISAAR (CPF): International standard archival authority record for corporate bodies, persons and families, 2nd Edition. 2011.
147
Library of Congress. Library of congress authorities.
148
National Council on Archives. National Council on Archives: Rules for the Construction of Personal, Place and Corporate Names. 1997. http://archiveshub.ac.uk/ncarules/
149
Davidson, J. Persistent identifiers. 2006.
150
Cox, E, Czechowski, L. Subject access points in the MARC record and archival finding aid: Enough or too many? Journal of Archival Organization. 2007;5.
151
Ribeiro, F. Subject indexing and authority control in archives: The need for subject indexing in archives and for an indexing policy using controlled language. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 1996;17.
152
DOI. The DOI system: Factsheets. 2011.
153
Vitali, S. The second edition of ISAAR(CPF) and authority control in systems for archival descriptive systems.
154
University of London Computer Centre. UK archival thesaurus.
155
UNESCO. UNESCO thesaurus.
156
Garrod, P. Use of the UNESCO thesaurus for subject indexing at UK NDAD. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2000;21.
157
Corporation for National Research Initiatives. Welcome to the handle system.
158
Higgins, Richard. A case study of EAD implementation at Durham University Library Archives and Special Collections. Archives and Museum Informatics. 1998;12.
159
Society of American Archivists. A different kind of web: new connections between archives and our users. Chicago: Society of American Archivists 2011.
160
Morris, L. Developing a cooperative intra-institutional approach to EAD implementation: The Harvard/Radcliffe digital findings aids project. American Archivist. 1997;60.
161
EAD Working Group. Development of the encoded archival description DTD. 1998.
162
Hill, Amanda, Stockting, William, Higgins, Sarah. Different strokes for different folks: Presenting EAD in three UK online catalogues. Journal of Archival Organization. 2006;183–95.
163
Kiesling, K. EAD as an archival descriptive standard. American Archivist. 1997;60.
164
Encoded Archival Context Working Group. Encoded archival context: Corporate bodies, persons and families. 2011.
165
Pitti, Daniel. Encoded Archival Description. An introduction and overview. D-Lib Magazine. 1999;5.
166
Stockting, William, Queyroux, F. Encoding across frontiers. Journal of Archival Organization 3 (2/3) 2004.
167
EAD Working Group. Encoded archival description tag library version 2002 - EAD technical document No. 2. 2002.
168
Johnston, D. From typescript finding aids to EAD (Encoded Archival Description). A university case study. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2001;22.
169
Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. Higher education in a Web 2.0 world. 2009.
170
Bouché, Nicole. Implementing EAD in the Yale University Library. American Archivist. 1997;60.
171
Higgins S, Inglis G. Implementing EAD: the experience of the NAHSTE project. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2003;24:199–214. doi: 10.1080/0037981032000127052
172
Fox, M. Implementing encoded archival description: An overview of administrative and technical considerations. American Archivist. 1997;60.
173
King, K. Introduction to Web 2.0 for archives.
174
EAD Practices Working Group. Library of Congress Encoded Archival Description best practices. 2008.
175
Miller DR, Clarke KS, ebrary, Inc. Putting XML to work in the library: tools for improving access and management. Chicago: American Library Association 2004.
176
RLG EAD Advisory Group. RLG best practice guidelines for encoded archival description. 2002.
177
Hajo, C. Scholarly editing in a Web 2.0 world. 2009.
178
Prom, Chris. The EAD cookbook. A survey and usability study. American Archivist. 2002;65.
179
Stevenson, J. The impact of Web 2.0 on archives. 2010.
180
Daines JG, Nimer CL. The Interactive Archivist. 2009. http://interactivearchivist.archivists.org/
181
Sweet, Meg. The internationalisation of EAD (Encoded Archival Description). Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2001;22.
182
Theimer KM. Web 2.0 tools and strategies for archives and local history collections. London: Facet 2010.
183
Stockdale, R. The retrospective conversion of the British Library manuscripts catalogues: A description of the project. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2000;21.
184
Tennant R. XML in libraries. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers 2002.
185
Godby CJ, Young JA, Childress E. A Repository of Metadata Crosswalks. D-Lib Magazine. 2004;10.
186
Archives and Records Council Wales. Archives Network Wales project evaluation: Results of a user survey , July-August 2005. 2005.
187
Kingsley, Nick. Archives Task Force Discussion paper 3: The Electronic "National Archives Network”. 2003.
188
Hill, Amanda. Bringing archives online with the Archives Hub. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2002;23.
189
Home, Rebecca. Crowdsourcing brings historical archive online. 2011.
190
Holley, Rose. Crowdsourcing: How and why should libraries do it? D-Lib Magazine. 2010;16.
191
Holley, Rose. Crowdsourcing strategies for archives. 2010.
192
Europeana: Think Culture. Europeana: Think culture: Strategic plan 2011-2015. 2012.
193
Europeana: Think Culture. Explore Europe’s cultural collections.
194
Alexander, Martha Latika, Gautam, J.N. Interoperability and open archives initiative protocol for metadata harvesting ( OAI-PMH ). 2004.
195
Archives Task Force. Listening to the past, Speaking to the future: Report of the Archives Task Force. 2004.
196
Chan, L, Zeng, M. Metadata interoperability and standardization: a study of methodology part 1: Achieving interoperability at schema level. D-Lib Magazine. 2006;12.
197
Zeng, M, Chan, L. Metadata interoperability and standardization - A study of methodology part II: Achieving interoperability at the record and repository levels. D-Lib Magazine. 2006;12.
198
Day, Michael. Metadata mapping between metadata formats. 2002.
199
Stevenson, Jane,, Ruddock, Bethan. Moving towards interoperability: Experiences of the Archives Hub. Ariadne. 2010;63.
200
Craig, Barbara L. Perimeters with fences? Or thresholds with doors? Two views of a border. American Archivist. 2003;66.
201
Hill, Amanda. Serving the invisible researcher: meeting the needs of online users. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2004;25.
202
Holley, Rose. Stories to tell: The making of our digital nation. 2010.
203
Online Archive of California. The Online Archive of California (OAC) Project: A prototype union database of encoded archival finding aids, 1998. 1998.
204
Mildren, Rob. The Scottish Archive Network Project evaluation report. 2004.
205
UK Archives Discovery Network. UKAD: Promoting archives discovery for the benefit of researchers.
206
Yeo, Geoffrey. Understanding users and use: A market segmentation approach. Journal of the Society of Archivists. 2005;26.
207
George Washington University. University writing class remembers holocaust victims. 2010.
208
ArchivalSoftware. http://archivalsoftware.pbworks.com/w/page/13600254/FrontPage
209
Spiro L. Archival Management Software: a Report for the Council on Library and Information Resources. 2009.
210
Council of Nova Scotia Archives’. Archives Management Software Review. 2009.
211
CDL Digital Special Collections. Collection Management and Creation Strategies for UC Special Collections and Archives. 2009.
212
Shapley M. The ANU Archives implementation of ica-atom software. 2014.
213
National Information Standards Organization (NISO). A framework of guidance for building good digital collections, 3rd edition. 2007;4–25.
214
Stobo, Victoria. Copyright and risk: Scoping the Wellcome Digital Library Project. 2013.
215
Padfield T, Post JB, Great Britain. Public Record Office. Copyright for archivists and users of archives. Richmond, Surrey: Public Record Office 2001.
216
National Library of New Zealand. Creating a digital New Zealand: New Zealand’s digital content strategy. 2007. http://www.itu.int/wsis/stocktaking/docs/activities/1211236218/DigitalContentStrategy.pdf
217
Smith L, Rowley J. Digitisation of local heritage: Local studies collections and digitisation in public libraries. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 2012;44:272–80. doi: 10.1177/0961000611434760
218
Wajon, Scott. Digitisation workflow. 2012.
219
Hughes L, Green D. Digitizing collections: strategic issues for the information manager. London: Facet 2002.
220
Dunning A. Digitizing the past: next steps for public sector digitization. Digital Information: Order or Anarchy?. Facet Publishing 2009:117–32.
221
New South Wales Government State Records. Equipment for digitisation.
222
Pancza, János. Hungarian National Digital Archive and Hungarian participation in Europeana.
223
Barry L, Tedd LA. Local studies collections online: an investigation in Irish public libraries. Program. 2008;42.
224
Daniel I. New digitisation workflow proposal. 2009.
225
Bülow A, Ahmon J, Spencer R, et al. Preparing collections for digitization. London: Facet, in association with the National Archives 2011.
226
Riley, Jenn. Seeing standards: A visualization of the metadata universe. 2010.
227
Stratton, Barbara. Seeking new landscapes: A rights clearance study in the context of mass digitisation of 140 books published between 1870 and 2010. 2010.
228
Vogt-O’Connor D. Selection of materials for scanning. In: Sitts MK, ed. Handbook for digital projects: a management tool for preservation and access. 2000.
229
University of Nottingham. The Wollaton Library Collection episode 3: Digitisation. 2012.
230
Padfield T. What is copyright? Copyright for archivists and records managers. London: Facet Publishing 2019.
231
Edina Data Centre. What is metadata? 2011.
232
Hughes L. Why digitize? The costs and benefits of digitization. Digitizing collections: strategic issues for the information manager. London: Facet 2002:4–30.
233
McGovern NY. A Digital Decade: Where Have We Been and Where Are We Going in Digital Preservation? RLG DigiNews. 2007;11.
234
The Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories. 2011.
235
Halbert M. Comparison of Strategies and Policies for Building Distributed Digital Preservation Infrastructure: Initial Findings from the MetaArchive Cooperative. International Journal of Digital Curation. 2009;4:43–59. doi: 10.2218/ijdc.v4i2.92
236
Digital Curation Centre. Curation Reference Manual | Digital Curation Centre. http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/curation-reference-manual
237
Brown A. Developing Practical Approaches to Active Preservation. International Journal of Digital Curation. 2007;2:3–11. doi: 10.2218/ijdc.v2i1.10
238
Harvey DR. Digital curation: a how-to-do-it manual. London: Facet 2010.
239
Rusbridge C. Excuse Me... Some Digital Preservation Fallacies? Ariadne. Published Online First: 2006.
240
Brown A. Practical digital preservation: a how-to guide for organizations of any size. London: Facet Publishing 2013.
241
PREMIS Editorial Committee. PREMIS Data Dictionary for Preservation Metadata, Version 3.0. 2015.
242
Consultative Committee for Space Data System Practices. Reference model for an open archival information system (OAIS). 2012.
243
Blue Ribbon Task Force. Sustainable Economies for a Digital Planet: Ensuring Long-Term Access to Digital Information. 2010.
244
Lavoie, Brian F. Technology watch report: The Open Archival Information System Reference Model: Introductory guide, 2nd Edition. 2014.
245
Higgins S. The DCC curation lifecycle model. The International Journal of Digital Curation. 2008;3:134–40.
246
Currall J, Johnson C, McKinney P. The world is all grown digital.... How shall a man persuade management what to do in such times? International Journal of Digital Curation. 2007;2:12–28. doi: 10.2218/ijdc.v2i1.11
247
Paradigm Project. Workbook on digital private papers. 2008.
