Um modelo de metadados para a autenticidade das descrições arquivísticas digitais
Palavras-chave:
representação da informação, descrição arquivística, metadados, modelo, autenticidadeResumo
O advento do paradigma informacional abalou muitos dos princípios da teoria e da prática arquivística. Um dos tópicos mais prementes prende-se com perceber até que ponto a informação digital pode ser confiável. Os recursos digitais são representados por metadados, e a confiança baseia-se na demonstração da sua autenticidade. Uma vez que os elementos tradicionais de verificação da autenticidade de documentos analógicos não se adequam ao mundo digital, o campo enfrenta um desafio. O uso abundante e pertinente de metadados capturados frequentemente parece ser uma das soluções mais relevantes. Este artigo pretende contribuir para a resolução deste problema propondo um modelo que tenta incluir os elementos de metadados mais relevantes para a captura da informação que pode ajudar a inferir a autenticidade das descrições arquivísticas digitais.
O modelo é baseado numa revisão sistemática da literatura sobre a descrição arquivística, bem como no mapeamento e na comparação extensivos de normas relevantes de estruturas de dados, usando uma metodologia de métodos mistos. A técnica qualitativa de investigação documental foi usada para recolher, analisar e interpretar um corpus de literatura científica. De forma complementar, a técnica quantitativa de engenharia de requisitos foi empregue para a extração dos requisitos de metadados das normas internacionais que possam apoiar na presunção da autenticidade. Ambas as abordagens foram posteriormente combinadas através de uma análise crítica num único modelo unificado para a autenticidade que se considera ser tão completo como necessário, mas tão simples quanto possível. O modelo pode ser utilizado por organizações ou como um contributo para a discussão da autenticidade e da confiabilidade nas descrições arquivísticas digitais.
Texto originalmente publicado em inglês no volume 23 (2024) da revista Archival Science, sob licença CCBY 4.0. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-023-09422-W. Acesso em 06 set. 2024. Traduzido pelos próprios autores
Referências
ACKER, A. When is a record?: a research framework for locating electronic records in infrastructure. In: GILLILAND, A.; MCKEMMISH, S.; LAU, A. (Eds.), Research in the Archival Multiverse (pp. 286–323). Monash University Publishing. 2017.
ANCHOR, R. ‘More product, less process’: method, madness or practice? Arch & Rec, 34 (2), 156–174. 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2013.818937 Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
ANDRADE, M. et al. Esquemas de metadados utilizados por repositórios digitais científicos e de objetos educacionais: estudo preliminar. Cadernos BAD, 2, 219–222. 2014.
APOSTOLOU, C. The role of metadata in managing knowledge. Loughborough University. 2009.
BACA, M. (ED.). Introduction to metadata (3o). Getty Research Institute. 2016.
BAGLEY, P. Extension of programming language concepts. University City Science Center. 1968.
BAILEY, J. Disrespect des fonds: rethinking arrangement and description in born-digital archives. Arch Jour, 3. 2013. Disponível em: http://www.archivejournal.net/issue/3/archives-remixed/disrespect-des-fonds-rethinking-arrangement-and-description-in-born-digital-archives. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
BEARMAN, D. Item level control and electronic recordkeeping. Arch and Mus Inf, 10(3), 195–245. 1996. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02802369. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
BENNACEUR, A. et al. Requirements Engineering. In: CHA S.; TAYLOR, R.; KANG, K. (Eds.), Handbook of Software Engineering (pp. 51–92). Springer International Publishing. 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00262-6. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
BEYENE, W.; GODWIN, T. Accessible search and the role of metadata. Lib Hi Tech, 36(1), 2–17. 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-08-2017-0170. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
BHATIA, S.; WRIGHT DE HERNANDEZ, A. D. Blockchain Is Already Here. What Does That Mean for Records Management and Archives? Jour of Arch Org, 16(1), 75–84. 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332748.2019.1655614. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
BOUNTOURI, L., GRATZ, P.; SANMARTIN, F. Digital preservation: how to be trustworthy. Conference of the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Initial Training Network for Digital Cultural Heritage (ITN-DCH), 10605, 364–374. 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75826-8. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
BREWER, J.; HUNTER, A. The Multimethod Approach and Its Promise. Foundations of Multimethod Research, 1–15. 2012. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984294.n1. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
BROTHMAN, B. The Limits of Limits: Derridean Deconstruction and the Archival Institution. Archivaria,36((Autumn 1993)), 205–220. 1993.
BROWN, R. The Value of “Narrativity” in the Appraisal of Historical Documents: Foundation for a Theory of Archival Hermeneutics. Archivaria, 32((Summer 1991)), 152–156. 1991.
BUNN, J. Developing descriptive standards: a renewed call to action. In Arch & Rec (Vol. 34, Issue 2, pp. 235–247). Taylor & Francis. 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2013.830066. Acesso em: 06 set. 202
BUREAU OF CANADIAN ARCHIVISTS. Rules for Archival Description. Bureau of Canadian Archivists. 2008. Disponível em: https://archivescanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/RADComplete_July2008.pdf. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
CARTA, G. Metadata and video games emulation: an effective bond to achieve authentic preservation? Rec Man Jour, 27 (2), 192–204. 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-10-2016-0037. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
CHEN, Y.-N et al. Metrics for metadata quality assurance and their implications for digital libraries. In: XING, C.; CRESTANI, F.; RAUBER, A. (Eds.), Digital Libraries: For Cultural Heritage, Knowledge Dissemination, and Future Creation. ICADL 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7008 (pp. 138–147). Springer. 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24826-9_19. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
CLOBRIDGE, A. Building a Digital Repository Program with Limited Resources. Chandos Publishing. 2010.
COOK, T. Archival science and postmodernism: new formulations for old concepts. Arch Sci, 1(March), 3–24. 2001. Disponível em: http://www.polonistyka.uj.edu.pl/documents/41623/111f093d-a2af-4fc6-8f9a-e193d85712a5. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
CRESWELL, J.; CLARK, V. Pesquisa de métodos mistos (2nd ed.). Porto Alegre: Penso. 2013.
CRESWELL, J.; CLARK, V. Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3o). SAGE Publications. 2018.
CRON, B. Metadata in Electronic Records Management. Records Express. 2016. Disponível em: https://records-express.blogs.archives.gov/2016/11/21/metadata-in-electronic-records-management/. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
CULKIN, J. M. A schoolman’s guide to Marshall McLuhan. Saturday Review, 51–53, 70–72. 1967.
CUMMING, K. Ways of seeing: Contextualising the continuum. Rec Man Jour, 20(1), 41–52. 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/09565691011036224. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
DANIEL, L.; DANIEL, L. Digital Forensics for Legal Professionals: Understanding Digital Evidence From the Warrant to the Courtroom. Syngress. 2012.
DOUGLAS, J. Toward More Honest Description. Ame Arch, 79(1), 26–55. 2016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.17723/0360-9081.79.1.26. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
DRYDEN, J. The Open Archival Information System Reference Model. Jour of Arch Org, 7(4), 214–217. 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332740903334116. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
DUFF, W.; YAKEL, E.; TIBBO, H. Archival reference knowledge. Ame Arch, 76(1), 68–94. 2013.
DUNCAN, C. Counterpoint: authenticity or bust. Archivaria, 68, 97–118. 2009.
DURANTI, L. The Archival Bond. Archives and Museum Informatics, 11(3), 213–218. 1997. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009025127463. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
DURANTI, L.; BLANCHETTE, J. The authenticity of electronic records: the InterPARES approach. 2004. Disponível em: http://www.interpares.org/display_file.cfm?doc=ip1-2_dissemination_cpr_duranti~blanchette_ist_2004.pdf. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
DURANTI, L. et al. Trusting Records and Data in the Cloud: the creation, management, and preservation of trustworthy digital content. 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.29085/9781783304042. Acesso em: 06 set. 2024
EASTWOOD, T. What is archival theory and why is it important? Archivaria, 1(37), 122–130. 1994. Disponível em: https://archivaria.ca/index.php/archivaria/article/view/11991. Acesso em: 18 out. 2024
ELINGS, M.; WAIBEL, G. Metadata for all: Descriptive standards and metadata sharing across libraries, archives and museums. First Monday, 12(3). 2007. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v12i3.1628. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
ENGVALL, T. Situating trust challenges of online trade. Rec Man Jour, 29(1/2), 272–286. 2019.
FACTOR, M. et al. Authenticity and Provenance in Long Term Digital Preservation: Modeling and Implementation in Preservation Aware Storage. Workshop on Theory and Practice of Provenance. 2009. Disponível em: https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/tapp09/tech/full_papers/factor/factor.pdf. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
FURNER, J. Definitions of “Metadata”: A Brief Survey of International Standards. Jour of the Asso for Inf Sci and Tech, 71(6), E33–E42. 2020. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24295. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
GARSHOL, L. M. Metadata? Thesauri? Taxonomies? Topic maps! Making sense of it all. Jour of Inf Sci, 30(4), 378–391. 2004. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551504045856. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
GARTNER, R. An XML schema for enhancing the semantic interoperability of archival description. Arch Sci, 15(3), 295–313. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-014-9225-1. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
GARTNER, R. Metadata: shaping knowledge from antiquity to the Semantic Web. Springer. 2016.
GILLILAND, A. Setting the stage. In: Baca M. (Ed.), Introduction to Metadata (3rd ed, pp. 1–20). Getty Research Institute. 2016.
GLADNEY, H. Preserving digital information. Springer. 2007.
GLADNEY, H. M. Long-term preservation of digital records: Trustworthy digital objects. Ame Arch, 72 (2), 401–435. 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.72.2.g513766100731832. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
GREENE, M. The Power of Archives: Archivists’ Values and Value in the Postmodern Age. Ame Arch, 72(1), 13–41. 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.72.1.k0322x0p38v44l53. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
GUEGUEN, G. et al. Toward an International Conceptual Model for Archival Description: A Preliminary Report from the International Council on Archives’ Experts Group on Archival Description. Ame Arch, 76 (2), 566–583. 2013.
HARRIS, V. Claiming less, delivering more: A critique of Positivist formulations on archives in South Africa. Archivaria, 44, 132–141. 1997.
HAYNES, D. Metadata for information management and retrieval (2o). Facet Publishing. 2018.
HEDSTROM, M. Descriptive Practices for Electronic Records: Deciding What Is Essential and Imagining What Is Possible. Archivaria, 36(0). 1993.
HOFMAN, D. et al. “The margin between the edge of the world and infinite possibility”: Blockchain,
GDPR and information governance. Rec Man Jourl, 29(1–2), 240–257. 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-12-2018-0045. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
HOOLAND, S. VAN; VERBORGH, R. Linked data for libraries, archives and museums. Facet Publishing Production. 2014.
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON ARCHIVES. Code of ethics. 1996.
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON ARCHIVES. Guide for managing electronic records from an archival perspective (Issue February). ICA Studies. 1997. Disponível em: https://www.ica.org/app/uploads/2023/12/ICA-Study-8-guide_eng.pdf. Acesso em: 18 out. 2024.
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON ARCHIVES. Principles and Functional Requirements Guidelines and Functional Requirements for Records in Electronic Office Environments - Module 2: Guidelines and Functional Requirements for Electronic Records management Systems. www.ica.org 2008.
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON ARCHIVES. Records in contexts. A conceptual model for archival description. Consultation draft. v0.1. 2016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739197000234. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON ARCHIVES. Records in Contexts: a Conceptual Model for Archival Description. Consulation Draft v0.2. 2019. Disponível em: https://www.ica.org/app/uploads/2023/12/RiC-CM-1.0.pdf. Acesso em: 18 out. 2024.
INTERPARES 1. Requirements for assessing and maintaining the authenticity of electronic records. 2002.
INTERPARES 2. The InterPARES 2 Project Glossary. In: Duranti, L.; Preston, R. (Eds.), International Research on Permanent Authentic Records in Electronic Systems (InterPARES) 2: Experiential, Interactive and Dynamic Records. Associazione Nazionale Archivistica Italiana. 2008.
ISO/IEC TR 19583-1. Information technology - Concepts and usage of metadata - Part 1: Metadata concepts. ISO. 2019. Disponível em: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui#iso:std:iso-iec:tr:19583:-1:ed-1:v1:en. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
JANES, A. Of maps and meta-records: Eighty- five years of map cataloguing at the national archives of the United Kingdom. Archivaria, 74(Fall 2012), 119–165. 2012.
JANSEN, A. Object-oriented diplomatics: using archival diplomatics in software application development to support authenticity of digital records. Rec Man Jour, 25(1), 45–55. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-04-2014-0022. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
JICK, T. Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action. Adm Sci Quar 24(4), 602–611. 1979.
JIMERSON, R. Archives and memory. In L. DURANTI & P. FRANKS (Eds.), Enc of Arch Sci (pp. 99–101). Rowman & Littlefield. 2015.
JONES, M. From catalogues to contextual networks: reconfiguring collection documentation in museums. Archives and Records, 39(1), 4–20. 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2017.1407750. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
KOCH, T. Electronic thesis and dissertation services: semantic interoperability, subject access, multilinguality. In: E-THESIS WORKSHOP. 2006. Disponível em: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/t.koch/publ/e-thesis-200601.html. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
LEMIEUX, V. Trusting records: is Blockchain technology the answer? Rec Man Jour, 26 (2), 110–139. 2016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-12-2015-0042. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
LI, C.; SUGIMOTO, S. Provenance Description of Metadata Vocabularies for the Long-term Maintenance of Metadata. Jour of Data and Inf Sci, 2 (2), 41–55. 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis2017-0007. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
LLANES-PADRÓN, D.; MORO-CABERO, M. Records in contexts: A new model for the representation of archival information in semantic Web scenarios. Prof de La Infn, 26(3), 525–533. 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2017.may.19. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
LUBAS, R.; JACKSON, A.; SCHNEIDER, I. The metadata manual: a practical handbook. Chandos Publishing. 2013.
MACHADO, L. M. O.; SOUZA, R. R.; SIMÕES, M. Semantic Web or Web of data? a diachronic study (1999 to 2017) of the publications of tim berners-lee and the world wide Web consortium. Jour of the Asso for Inf Sci and Tech, 70(7), 701–714. 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24111. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
MACNEIL, H. Trusting Records: Legal, Historical, and Diplomatic Perspectives. Kluwer Academic Publishers. 2000.
MACNEIL, H. Picking our text: archival description, authenticity, and the archivist as editor. Ame Arch, 68(Fall/Winter), 264–278. 2005.
MACNEIL, H. Trusting description: authenticity, accountability, and archival description standards. Journal of Archival Organization, 7(3), 89–107. 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332740903117693. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
MACNEIL, H. Deciphering and Interpreting an Archival Fonds and Its parts. In A. GILLILAND, S.MCKEMMISH, & A. LAU (Eds.), Research in the Archival Multiverse (pp. 161–197). Monash University Publishing. 2017.
MAK, B. Authenticity. In L. DURANTI, L.; FRANKS, P. (Eds.), Enc of Arch Sci (pp. 119–122). Rowman & Littlefield. 2015.
MCLEOD, J. Reinventing archival methods: Reconceptualising electronic records management as a wicked problem. Arch and Man, 42 (2), 193–196. 2014. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2014.911687. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
MCLEOD, J.; GORMLY, B. Using the cloud for records storage: issues of trust. Arch Sci, 17(4), 349–370. 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-017-9280-5. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
MEEHAN, J. Making the leap from parts to whole: Evidence and inference in archival arrangement and description. Ame Arch, 72(1), 72–90. 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.72.1.kj672v4907m11x66. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
MOYANO COLLADO, J. La descripción archivística. De los instrumentos de descripción hacia la Web semántica. Anales de Doc, 16 (2). 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.6018/analesdoc.16.2.171841. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
NARA. Bulletin. 2015-04: Metadata Guidance for the Transfer of Permanent Electronic Records. 2015. Disponível em: https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/bulletins/2015/2015-04.html. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
NESMITH, T. Still Fuzzy, But More Accurate: Some Thoughts on the “Ghosts” of Archival Theory. Archivaria, 47((Spring)), 136–150. 1999
NISO. Understanding Metadata. NISO Press. 2004.
NISO. Understanding metadata: what is metadata, and what is it for? NISO Press. 2017. Disponível em: https://www.niso.org/publications/understanding-metadata-2017. Acesso em: 18 out. 2024.
NIU, J. Recordkeeping metadata and archival description: A revisit. Arch and Man, 41(3), 203–215. 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2013.829751. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
NIU, J. Archival Intellectual Control in the Digital Age. Jour of Arch Org, 12(3–4), 186–197. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332748.2015.1154747. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
NIU, J. Linked data for archives. Archivaria, 82(Fall 2016), 83–110. 2016.
PACHECO, A. Metadados para a descrição arquivística digital: proposta de um modelo para a autenticidade Tese (Doutoramento Ciência da Informação) – Faculdade de Letras, Universidade de Coimbra. Coimbra, Portugal, 2022. Disponível em: https://estudogeral.uc.pt/handle/10316/99358. Acesso: 18 out. 2024
PACHECO, A; SILVA, C. G. From the Archival Bond to the Informational Bond. Preservation, Digital Technology and Culture, 2023. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1515/pdtc-2023-0004. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
PACHECO, A., SILVA, C.G.; FREITAS, M.C.V. A metadata model for authenticity in digital archival descriptions. Arch Sci 23, 629–673. 2023. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-023-09422-w. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
PADRÓN, D. L.; CABERO, M. M. M. La descripción archivística y la curaduría digital: relaciones y perspectivas. 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.31229/osf.io/265vr. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
PASTOR-SÁNCHEZ, J.A.; LLANES-PADRÓN, D. Records in context: el camino de los archivos hacia la interoperabilidad semántica. Anuario ThinkEPI, 11, 297. 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3145/thinkepi.2017.56. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
POMERANTZ, J. Metadata. MIT Press. 2015.
PRICE, D. M.; SMITH, J. J. The trust continuum in the information age: A Canadian perspective. Arch Sci, 11(3–4), 253–276. 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-011-9148-z. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
RAMESH, P.; VIVEKAVARDHAN, J.; BHARATHI, K. Metadata diversity, interoperability and resource discovery issues and challenges. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 35(3), 193–199. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.35.3.8074. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
RIDENER, J. From Polders to Postmodernism: A Concise History of Archival Theory. Litwin Books. 2009.
ROGERS, C. Virtual Authenticity: Authenticity of Digital Records from Theory to Practice (Issue April) [University of British Columbia]. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.14288/1.0166169. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
ROLAN, G. Towards archive 2.0: Issues in archival systems interoperability. Arch and Man, 43(1), 42–60. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2014.959535. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
ROLAN, G., et al. More human than human? Artificial intelligence in the archive. Arch and Man, 47 (2), 179–203. 2019. Disponível em:https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2018.1502088. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
ROSENBERG, J. Linguistic representation. D. Reidel Publishing Company. 1981.
SAMOUELIAN, M. Embracing Web 2.0: Archives and the newest generation of Web applications. Ame Arch, 72(1), 42–71. 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.72.1.k73112x7n0773111. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
SCHAEFFER, B. et al. A service-oriented framework for real-time and distributed geoprocessing. Lect Not in Geoinf and Cart, 199579, 3–20. 2012. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10595-1_1. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
SEREWICZ, L. Do we need bigger buckets or better search engines?: the challenge of unlimited storage and semantic Web search for records management. Rec Man Jour, 20 (2), 172–181. 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/09565691011064313. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
SILVA, C. G. Investigação Documental. In S. GONÇALVES, J. GONÇALVES, & C. MARQUES (Eds.), Manual de Investigação Qualitativa: Conceção, Análise e Aplicações (pp. 103–123). Pactor. 2021.
SILVA, I. A organização e a representação do conhecimento no domínio da arquivística. Universidade Estadual Paulista. 2012.
SOCIETY OF AMERICAN ARCHIVISTS. Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology. 2005. Disponível em: http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/f/fonds . Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
SOCIETY OF AMERICAN ARCHIVISTS. Society of American Archivists core values statement and code of ethics. 2012. Disponível em: https://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statement-and-code-of-ethics. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
STAMOU, S.; EFTHIMIADIS, E. Interpreting User Inactivity on Search Results. Advances in Information Retrieval. ECIR 2010. Lect Not in Comp Sci, Vol 5993. 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12275-0_12. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
SUDMANNS, M et al. Semantic and syntactic interoperability in online processing of big Earth observation data. Inter Jour of Dig Earth, 11(1), 95–112. 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2017.1332112. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
SUVAK, W. Authentication. In DURANTI, L. FRANKS, P. (Eds.), Enc of Arch Sci (pp. 116–119). Rowman & Littlefield. 2015.
TENNANT, R. Different Paths to Interoperability. Lib Jour, 126(3), 118–119. 2001.
THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES OF THE UK. Functional Requirements for Electronic Records Management Systems - Reference document. 2002.
TOUGH, A. Thinking about and working with archives and records: a personal reflection on theory and practice. Arch and Rec, 37 (2), 225–238. 2016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2016.1147343. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
UPWARD, F. Modelling the continuum as paradigm shift in recordkeeping and archiving processes, and beyond - a personal reflection. Rec Man Jour, 10(3), 115–139. 2000. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000007259. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
VERBORGH, R. et al. The fallacy of the multi-API culture conceptual and practical benefits of representational state transfer. Jour of Doc, 71 (2), 233–252. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-07-2013-0098. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
WARTOFSKY, M. Models: Representation and the Scientific Understanding (Vol. 129). D. Reidel Publishing Company. 1979.
WITTEN, I.; BAINBRIDGE, D.; NICHOLS, D. How to build a digital library. Elsevier, Morgan Kaufmann. 2010.
WOODLEY, M. Metadata Matters: Connection People and Information. In M. BACA (Ed.), Introduction to Metadata (3o ed, pp. 38–60). Getty Research Institute. 2016.
WRIGHT, K. Broadening the record and expanding the archives. Arch & Man, 42 (2), 219–221. 2014.
Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2014.911693. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
YAKEL, E. Archival representation. Arch Sci, 3(1), 1–25. 2003. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02438926. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
YEO, G. Rising to the level of a record? Some thoughts on records and documents. Rec Man Jour, 21(1), 8–27. 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/09565691111125071. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
YEO, G. Bringing things together: Aggregate records in a digital age. Archivaria, 74(Fall 2012), 43–91. 2012.
YEO, G. Trust and context in cyberspace. I: Arch & Rec (Vol. 34, Issue 2, pp. 214–234). Taylor & Francis. 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2013.825207. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
YEO, G. Records, information and data. Facet Publishing. 2018.
YOUN, E. Adoption of ISAD(G) in practice: a close look at the standardization process of ISAD(G) in a manuscript archives of Korea. Arch & Rec, 36 (2), 128–145. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2015.1029892. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
ZENG, M. L.; CHAN, L. M. Semantic Interoperability. In: BATES, M.; MAACK, M. (Eds.), Enc of Lib and Inf Sci. Volume I (3rd ed., pp. 4645–4662). Dekker Encyclopedias, Taylor and Francis Group. 2010.
ZENG, M. L.; QIN, J. Metadata (2o). Facet Publishing. 2016.
ZHANG, J. Archival representation in the digital age. Jour of Arch Org, 10(1), 45–68. 2012b. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332748.2012.677671. Acesso em: 09 set. 2024
ZHANG, J. Original order in digital archives. Archivaria, 74(Fall 2012), 167–193. 2012c.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Categorias
Licença
Copyright (c) 2024 André Pacheco, Carlos Guardado da Silva, Maria Cristina Vieira de Freitas
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Declaração de Direito Autoral
Os autores são os detentores dos direitos autorais dos manuscritos submetidos, sendo autorizado à Revista do Arquivo a publicação do referido texto. Os dados, conceitos e opiniões apresentados nos trabalhos, bem como a exatidão das referências documentais e bibliográficas, são de inteira responsabilidade dos autores.
Este obra está licenciada com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional.
