Encoded Archival Description

Last updated

Encoded Archival Description (EAD) is a standard for encoding descriptive information regarding archival records. [1]

Contents

Overview

Archival records differ from the items in a library collection because they are unique, usually unpublished and unavailable elsewhere, and because they exist as part of a collection that unifies them. [2] For these reasons, archival description involves a hierarchical and progressive analysis that emphasizes the intellectual structure and content of the collection and does not always extend to the level of individual items within it. [3]

Following the development of technologies in the middle to late 1980s that enabled the descriptive encoding of machine-readable findings, it became possible to consider the development of digital finding aids for archives. [1] Work on an encoding standard for archival description began in 1992 at the University of California, Berkeley, and in 1998 the first version of EAD was released. [4] A second version was released in 2002, and the latest version, EAD3, was released in August 2015. [5] The Society of American Archivists and the Library of Congress are jointly responsible for the maintenance and development of EAD. [6]

EAD is now used around the world by archives, libraries, museums, national libraries and historical societies. [1] Through a standardized system for encoding the descriptions of archival finding aids, EAD allows users to locate primary sources that are geographically remote. [7] At its highest level, an EAD finding aid includes control information about the description as well as a description of the collection itself. [8] EAD3 was revised in 2018 to address concerns relating to the ease of access to archival descriptions and its ability to interface with other systems. [9] [10]

Example of Elements in the EAD3 Tag Library Example of Elements in the EAD3 Tag Library.jpg
Example of Elements in the EAD3 Tag Library

Background and need

Archives by their very nature are different from libraries. While libraries contain individual items, such as books and journals, of which multiple, identical copies exist, archives contain records that are both unique and interrelated. [11] Archives represent the activities of a person, family or organization that are created and accumulated naturally in the course of their ordinary activities. [11] In contrast to the items in a library, therefore, all the items in an archival collection share a relationship. [2] The entire body of the records of an organization, family or individual have been created and accumulated as a byproduct of the organization or individual’s existence, and therefore share a common origin, which is referred to by archivists as its provenance; provenance refers to both the origin of an item or collection as well as its custody and ownership. [12] Archivists refer to the entire body or records of an individual or organization as its fonds ; the fonds is thus a conceptual whole that reflects the process of the production or accumulation of records that share a common function or activity and exhibit a natural unity. [12] A fonds may contain anywhere from one item to millions of items, and may consist in any form, including manuscripts, charts, drawings, maps, audio, video or electronic records. [11]

Because published materials differ in significant and fundamental ways from the collections of interrelated and unique materials found in archives, there are significant differences in bibliographic and archival description. [11] A bibliographic description represents an individual published item, is based on and derived from the physical item, and is thus considered item-level. [3] Archival description, by contrast, represents a collection, or a fonds, often containing individual items of various media, sharing a common origin, or provenance. [13] The description of archival materials, therefore, involves a complex hierarchical and progressive analysis. [3] It begins by describing the whole, then moves down to subcomponents; the description frequently does not extend to the item level. [14] In this way archival description focuses on the intellectual structure and content of the collection rather than its physical characteristics. [15]

A finding aid is a tool that helps users to find materials within an archive through the description of its contents. [12] Most findings aids provide similar types of information, including, at a minimum, a title that connects the finding aid to the creator of the collection; a summary of the material contained in the finding aid; background and context of the collection, including major figures involved; and information about the custody of the collection as well as any conditions or restrictions regarding its use. [16]

The unique nature of archival records and the geographic distribution of individual collections has presented a challenge for those wishing to locate and access them for over 150 years. [7] With the advent of international networked computing and online catalogs, however, the potential emerged for making archival collections searchable online. [14]

History

EAD originated at the 1993 Society of American Archivists annual meeting in New Orleans and was headed by Daniel Pitti at the University of California, Berkeley. [17] The project's goal was to create a data standard for describing archives, similar to the MARC standards for describing bibliographic materials. The initial EAD Version 1.0 was released in the fall of 1998. [18] Such a standard enables archives, museums, libraries, and manuscript repositories to list and describe their holdings in a manner that would be machine-readable and therefore easy to search, maintain and exchange. [19] Since its inception, many archives and special collections have adopted it.

In addition to the development and maintenance work done by the Society of American Archivists and the Library of Congress, the Research Libraries Group (RLG) has developed and published a set of "Best Practice" implementation guidelines [20] for EAD, which lays out mandatory, recommended, and optional elements and attributes. RLG has also provided a kind of clearinghouse for finding aids in EAD format, known as ArchiveGrid. Member libraries provide RLG the URL for their finding aids; RLG automatically harvests data from the finding aids, indexes it, and provides a search interface for the index, thus giving researchers the ability to search across several hundred institutions' collections with a single query. RLG also has developed the "RLG Report Card," [21] an automated quality-checking program that will analyze an EAD instance and report any areas where it diverges from the best practices guidelines.

SAA's Technical Subcommittee for Encoded Archival Description, which include international representation, embarked on a revision of the EAD standard in 2010. [22] The latest version, EAD3, was released in August 2015. [23]

Adoption

A number of repositories in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Australia and elsewhere have adopted and implemented EAD with varying levels of technical sophistication. One of the most ambitious efforts is the Online Archive of California, a union catalog of over 5,000 EAD finding aids covering manuscripts and images from institutions across the state. The French National Library Francois Mitterrand publishes more than 90,000 EAD finding aids covering archives and manuscripts.[ citation needed ]

EAD element set

The EAD standard's XML schema specifies the elements to be used to describe a manuscript collection as well as the arrangement of those elements (for example, which elements are required, or which are permitted inside which other elements). The EAD tag set has 146 elements and is used both to describe a collection as a whole, and also to encode a detailed multi-level inventory of the collection. Many EAD elements have been, or can be, mapped to content standards (such as DACS and ISAD(G)) and other structural standards (such as MARC or Dublin Core), increasing the flexibility and interoperability of the data. [24]

EAD 1.0 was an SGML document type definition (DTD). EAD 2002, the second incarnation of EAD, was finalized in December 2002 and made available as an XML DTD. The latest version of EAD, EAD3, is available as both an XML schema and a DTD. [25]

Parts of an EAD finding aid

Note: Examples in this section are EAD2, and may not be valid against the EAD3 schema.

eadheader

Note: In the current release of EAD3 1.0, the eadheader element has been replaced with the control element. [26]

The first section of an EAD-encoded finding aid is the eadheader. This section contains the title and optional subtitle of the collection and detailed information about the finding aid itself: who created it, when it was created, its revision history, the language the finding aid is written in, and so on. The eadheader itself has a number of required attributes that map to various ISO standards such as ISO 3166-1 for country codes and ISO 8601 for date formats.

The eadheader and its child elements can be mapped to other standards for easy interchange of information. They are often mapped to Dublin Core elements such as Creator, Author, Language. For example, in the excerpt below the relatedencoding="DC" attribute of the eadheader element specifies that child elements will be mapped to Dublin Core; the child element <author encodinganalog="Creator"> indicates that the EAD element <author> maps to the Dublin Core element <creator>.

Example of an eadheader:

<eadheaderaudience="internal"countryencoding="iso3166-1"dateencoding="iso8601"langencoding="iso639-2b"relatedencoding="DC"repositoryencoding="iso15511"scriptencoding="iso15924"><eadidcountrycode="us"identifier="bachrach_lf"mainagencycode="NSyU">bachrach_lf</eadid><filedesc><titlestmt><titleproperencodinganalog="Title">LouisFabianBachrachPapers</titleproper><subtitle>AninventoryofhispapersatBlankUniversity</subtitle><authorencodinganalog="Creator">MarySmith</author></titlestmt><publicationstmt><publisherencodinganalog="Publisher">BlankUniversity</publisher><dateencodinganalog="Date"normal="1981">1981</date></publicationstmt></filedesc><profiledesc><creation>JohnJones <datenormal="2006-09-13">13Sep2006</date></creation><langusage><languageencodinganalog="Language"langcode="eng">English</language></langusage></profiledesc></eadheader>

archdesc

The archdesc section contains the description of the collection material itself. First, the Descriptive Identification or did element contains a description of the collection as a whole, including the creator (which may be an individual or an organization), size (usually given in linear feet), inclusive dates, language(s), and an abstract or brief description. As with the eadheader above, elements may be mapped to corresponding standards; elements in this section are usually mapped to MARC elements. For example, in the excerpt below the relatedencoding="MARC21" attribute of the archdesc element specifies that child elements will be mapped to MARC21; the child element <unittitle encodinganalog="245$a" label="Title: "> indicates that the unittitle element maps to MARC field 245, subfield a.

Example:

<archdesclevel="collection"type="inventory"relatedencoding="MARC21"><did><head>OverviewoftheCollection</head><repositoryencodinganalog="852$a"label="Repository: ">BlankUniversity</repository><originationlabel="Creator: "><persnameencodinganalog="100">Brightman,SamuelC.(SamuelCharles),1911-1992</persname></origination><unittitleencodinganalog="245$a"label="Title: ">SamuelC.BrightmanPapers</unittitle><unitdateencodinganalog="245$f"normal="1932/1992"type="inclusive"label="Inclusive Dates: ">1932-1992</unitdate><physdescencodinganalog="300$a"label="Quantity: "><extent>6linearft.</extent></physdesc><abstractencodinganalog="520$a"label="Abstract: ">PapersoftheAmericanjournalistincludingsomewarcorrespondence,politicalandpoliticalhumorwritings,andadulteducationmaterial </abstract><unitidencodinganalog="099"label="Identification: "countrycode="us"repositorycode="NSyU">2458163</unitid><langmateriallabel="Language: "encodinganalog="546"><languagelangcode="eng">English</language></langmaterial></did></archdesc>

Several additional descriptive elements may follow the did including:

The second, and usually largest, section of the archdesc is the dsc, which contains a full inventory of the collection broken down into progressively smaller intellectual chunks. EAD offers two options: the c element which can be nested within itself to an unlimited level, and a set of numbered container elements c01 through c12 which can only be nested numerically (i.e. a c01 can contain only a c02; a c02 can contain only a c03, and so on). Note that the c and c0# elements refer to intellectual subdivisions of the material; the actual physical container is specified using the container element. The inventory may go down to as detailed a level as desired. The example below shows an inventory to the folder level.

Example of an inventory:

<dsctype="combined"><head>Inventory</head><c01><did><unittitle>Correspondence</unittitle></did><c02><did><unittitle>Adams,Martha</unittitle><unitdatenormal="1962/1967">1962-1967</unitdate><containertype="box">1</container><containertype="folder">1</container></did></c02><c02><did><unittitle>Barnett,Richard</unittitle><unitdatenormal="1965">1965</unitdate><containertype="box">1</container><containertype="folder">2</container></did></c02>...etc </c01><c01><did><unittitle>Writings</unittitle></did><c02><did><unittitle>Shortstories</unittitle><unitdatenormal="1959/1979">1959-1979</unitdate><containertype="box">5</container><containertype="folder">1-9</container></did></c02></c01></dsc>

Citing EAD

There have been some studies about how to cite EAD files with variable granularity. In particular, Buneman and Silvello [27] proposed a rule-based system to automatically create citation snippets to be used as references when citing XML data; a case study is based on EAD. Furthermore, Silvello [28] proposed a framework, which learning from examples, automatically creates references at a different level of coarseness for XML files. This framework has been tested on the Library of Congress collection of EAD files.

Criticism

A user study [29] analyzing the user interaction patterns with finding aids highlighted that "[they] focus on rules for description rather than on facilitating access to and use of the materials they list and describe", and that many archive users have serious issues using finding aids. Common and frequent user interaction patterns with finding aids are navigational and thus they require to browse the archival hierarchy to make sense of the archival data. [30]

Some critics claim that EAD constrains researcher interaction because several operations are either impossible or inefficient. [31] For example, it is problematic to:

Furthermore, EAD allows for several degrees of freedom in tagging practice, which may turn out to be problematic in the automatic processing of EAD files, since it is difficult to know in advance how an institution will use the hierarchical elements. It has been underlined that only EAD files meeting stringent best practice guidelines are shareable and searchable. [36]

See also

Related Research Articles

A document type definition (DTD) is a specification file that contains set of markup declarations that define a document type for an SGML-family markup language. The DTD specification file can be used to validate documents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">XML</span> Markup language by the W3C for encoding of data

Extensible Markup Language (XML) is a markup language and file format for storing, transmitting, and reconstructing arbitrary data. It defines a set of rules for encoding documents in a format that is both human-readable and machine-readable. The World Wide Web Consortium's XML 1.0 Specification of 1998 and several other related specifications—all of them free open standards—define XML.

DocBook is a semantic markup language for technical documentation. It was originally intended for writing technical documents related to computer hardware and software, but it can be used for any other sort of documentation.

XSD, a recommendation of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), specifies how to formally describe the elements in an Extensible Markup Language (XML) document. It can be used by programmers to verify each piece of item content in a document, to assure it adheres to the description of the element it is placed in.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Geography Markup Language</span> XML grammar for geographical features

The Geography Markup Language (GML) is the XML grammar defined by the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) to express geographical features. GML serves as a modeling language for geographic systems as well as an open interchange format for geographic transactions on the Internet. Key to GML's utility is its ability to integrate all forms of geographic information, including not only conventional "vector" or discrete objects, but coverages and sensor data.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Text Encoding Initiative</span> Academic community concerned with text encoding

The Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) is a text-centric community of practice in the academic field of digital humanities, operating continuously since the 1980s. The community currently runs a mailing list, meetings and conference series, and maintains the TEI technical standard, a journal, a wiki, a GitHub repository and a toolchain.

An XML schema is a description of a type of XML document, typically expressed in terms of constraints on the structure and content of documents of that type, above and beyond the basic syntactical constraints imposed by XML itself. These constraints are generally expressed using some combination of grammatical rules governing the order of elements, Boolean predicates that the content must satisfy, data types governing the content of elements and attributes, and more specialized rules such as uniqueness and referential integrity constraints.

The Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) specification defines a set of document types for authoring and organizing topic-oriented information, as well as a set of mechanisms for combining, extending, and constraining document types. It is an open standard that is defined and maintained by the OASIS DITA Technical Committee.

The PBCore metadata standard was created by the public broadcasting community in the United States of America for use by public broadcasters and related communities that manage audiovisual assets, including libraries, archives, independent producers, etc. PBCore is organized as a set of specified fields that can be used in database applications, and it can be used as a data model for media cataloging and asset management systems. As an XML schema, PBCore enables data exchange between media collections, systems and organizations.

The Archives Hub is a Jisc service, and is freely available to all. It provides a cross-search of descriptions of archives held across the United Kingdom, in over 320 institutions, including universities, colleges, specialist repositories, charities, businesses and other institutions. It includes over 1,000,000 descriptions of archive materials on all manner of subjects, which represents over 30,000 archive collections. It also describes content available through topic-based websites, often created as a result of digitisation projects.

A finding aid, in the context of archival science, is an organization tool, a document containing detailed, indexed, and processed metadata and other information about a specific collection of records within an archive. Finding aids often consist of a documentary inventory and description of the materials, their source, and their structure. The finding aid for a fonds is usually compiled by the collection's entity of origin, provenance, or by an archivist during archival processing, and may be considered the archival science equivalent of a library catalog or a museum collection catalog. The finding aid serves the purpose of locating specific information within the collection. The finding aid can also help the archival repository manage their materials and resources. The history of finding aids mirrors the history of information. Ancient Sumerians had their own systems of indexes to locate bureaucratic and administrative records. Finding aids in the 19th and 20th centuries were paper documents, such as lists or index cards. In the 21st century, they can be created in electronic formats like spreadsheets or databases. The standard machine-readable format for manuscript collection finding aids, widely used in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Australia and elsewhere, is Encoded Archival Description.

RDFa or Resource Description Framework in Attributes is a W3C Recommendation that adds a set of attribute-level extensions to HTML, XHTML and various XML-based document types for embedding rich metadata within Web documents. The Resource Description Framework (RDF) data-model mapping enables its use for embedding RDF subject-predicate-object expressions within XHTML documents. It also enables the extraction of RDF model triples by compliant user agents.

Archival processing is the act of surveying, arranging, describing, and performing basic preservation activities on the recorded material of an individual, family, or organization after they are permanently transferred to an archive. A person engaging in this activity is known as an archival processor, archival technician, or archivist.

Encoded Archival Context – Corporate bodies, Persons and Families (EAC-CPF) is an XML standard for encoding information about the creators of archival materials – i.e., a corporate body, person or family -- including their relationships to (a) resources and (b) other corporate bodies, persons and families. The goal is to provide contextual information regarding the circumstances of record creation and use. EAC-CPF can be used in conjunction with Encoded Archival Description (EAD) for enhancement of EAD's capabilities in encoding finding aids, but can also be used in conjunction with other standards or for standalone authority file encoding.

Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS) is a standard used for describing materials in archives. First adopted by the Society of American Archivists (SAA) in March 2004, DACS was updated with a Second Edition in 2013. DACS is broken down into a set of rules used in crafting archival descriptions, and guidelines for creating authority records in archives.

ISAD(G) (General International Standard Archival Description) defines the elements that should be included in an archival finding aid. It was approved by the International Council on Archives (ICA/CIA) as an international framework standard to register archival documents produced by corporations, persons and families.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Archival research</span> Type of research using evidence from archival records

Archival research is a type of research which involves seeking out and extracting evidence from archival records. These records may be held either in collecting institutions, such as libraries and museums, or in the custody of the organization that originally generated or accumulated them, or in that of a successor body. Archival research can be contrasted with (1) secondary research, which involves identifying and consulting secondary sources relating to the topic of enquiry; and (2) with other types of primary research and empirical investigation such as fieldwork and experiment.

Social Networks and Archival Context (SNAC) is an online project for discovering, locating, and using distributed historical records in regard to individual people, families, and organizations.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Pitti, D (2012). "Encoded Archival Description (EAD)." In Bates, Marcia J., (ed.) Understanding Information Retrieval Systems: Management, Types, and Standards. pp. 685–697. London: Auerbach Publications.
  2. 1 2 Eastwood, T. "A Contested Realm: The Nature of Archives and the Orientation of Archival Science." In Currents of Archival Thinking, Terry Eastwood and Heather MacNeil, eds. (Libraries Unlimited, 2017): 3–23.
  3. 1 2 3 Pitti, Daniel V. (November 1999). "Encoded Archival Description: An Introduction and Overview". New Review of Information Networking. 5 (1): 61–69. doi:10.1080/13614579909516936 via Taylor and Francis Online.
  4. Ruth, J. "The Development and Structure of the Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Document Type Definition." In Encoded Archival Description on the Internet, Daniel V. Pitti and Wendy M. Duff, eds. (Hawthorn Information Press, 2001): 27–59.
  5. "Encoded Archival Description Tag Library Version EAD3 1.1.0". Library of Congress. Retrieved 2018-11-18.
  6. "EAD: Encoded Archival Description (EAD Official Site, Library of Congress)". www.loc.gov. Retrieved 2018-11-18.
  7. 1 2 Pitti, Daniel V. (Summer 1997). "Encoded Archival Description: The Development of an Encoding Standard for Archival Finding Aids". American Archivist. 60 (3): 268–283. doi: 10.17723/aarc.60.3.f5102tt644q123lx .
  8. Ruth, Janice (July 1997). "Encoded Archival Description: A Structural Overview". The American Archivist. 60 (3): 310–329. doi: 10.17723/aarc.60.3.g121j46347828122 . ISSN   0360-9081.
  9. "EAD Tag Library". www.loc.gov. Retrieved 2018-11-18.
  10. Ferro, N. and Silvello, G. (2016). "From Users to Systems: Identifying and Overcoming Barriers to Efficiently Access Archival Data." In Accessing Cultural Heritage at Scale, Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Accessing Cultural Heritage at Scale, co-located with Joint Conference on Digital Libraries 2016 (JCDL 2016), Newark, USA, June 22, 2016.
  11. 1 2 3 4 PItti, and Duff, Daniel V. and Wendy M. (2001). Encoded Archival Description on the Internet. Oxford: The Haworth Information Press. pp. 1–6. ISBN   978-0-7890-1397-2.
  12. 1 2 3 Pearce-Moses, Richard (2005). A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology. Chicago: Society of American Archivists. pp. 173–174. ISBN   978-1-931666-14-5.
  13. Terry Cook, "The Concept of the Archival Fonds: Theory, Description, and Provenance in the Post-Custodial Era", in Terry Eastwood (ed.), The Archival Fonds: From Theory to Practice (Ottawa: Bureau of Canadian Archivists, Planning Committee on Descriptive Standards, 1992), pp. 42-43.
  14. 1 2 Pitti, Daniel V. (2009), "Encoded Archival Description (EAD)", Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, Third Edition, CRC Press, pp. 1699–1707, doi:10.1081/e-elis3-120044047, ISBN   9780849397127
  15. Duff and Harris, Wendy and Verne (2002). "Stories and Names: Archival Description as Narrating Records and Constructing Meanings". Archival Science. 2 (3–4): 263–285. doi:10.1007/BF02435625. S2CID   144684933.
  16. Dow, E. (2005). Creating EAD-Compatible Finding Guides on Paper. Scarecrow Press: Oxford (2005).
  17. Dooley, Jackie M., ed. (1998). Encoded Archival Description: Context, Theory, and Case Studies. Chicago: The Society of American Archivists. ISBN   978-0931828430.
  18. Pitti, Daniel V.; Duff, Wendy M., eds. (2001). Encoded Archival Description on the Internet. Binghamton, N.Y.: The Hawthorn Information Press. ISBN   978-0789013972.
  19. "Development of the Encoded Archival Description DTD". Library of Congress .
  20. , RLG Best Practice Guidelines for Encoded Archival Description, 2002.
  21. , RLG EAD Report Card.
  22. "EAD Revision Under Way," Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/ead/eadrevision.html
  23. "EAD3 1.0 is available! | Society of American Archivists". www2.archivists.org. Retrieved 2015-10-19.
  24. Stockting, B (2004). "Time to Settle Down? EAD Encoding Principles in the Access to Archives Programme (A2A) and the Research Libraries Group's Best Practice Guidelines". Journal of Archival Organization. 2 (3): 7–24. doi:10.1300/j201v02n03_02. S2CID   62235898.
  25. EAD schema and other files for download via GitHub
  26. "EAD: Encoded Archival Description (EAD Official Site, Library of Congress)". www.loc.gov. Retrieved 2016-01-06.
  27. Buneman, P. and Silvello, G. (2010). ‘A Rule-Based Citation System for Structured and Evolving Datasets’. IEEE Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Data Engineering, Vol. 3, No. 3. IEEE Computer Society, pp. 33-41, September 2010. Available online: http://sites.computer.org/debull/A10sept/buneman.pdf
  28. Silvello, G. (2016). ‘Learning to Cite Framework: How to Automatically Construct Citations for Hierarchical Data’. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (JASIST), to appear, 2016. Pre-print available online: http://www.dei.unipd.it/~silvello/papers/2016-DataCitation-JASIST-Silvello.pdf
  29. Freund, L.; Toms, E. G. (2016). "Interacting with Archival Finding Aids". Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67 (4): 994–1008. doi:10.1002/asi.23436. S2CID   8658071.
  30. N. Ferro and G. Silvello (2016). `From Users to Systems: Identifying and Overcoming Barriers to Efficiently Access Archival Data`. ACHS@JCDL 2016. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1611/paper2.pdf
  31. Ferro, N.; Silvello, G. (2013). "NESTOR: A Formal Model for Digital Archives". Information Processing & Management. 49 (6): 1206–1240. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2013.05.001. hdl: 11577/2666665 . S2CID   11239149.
  32. N. Ferro and G. Silvello. A Methodology for Sharing Archival Descriptive Metadata in a Distributed Environment. In Proc. 12th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries, pages 268–279. LNCS 5173, Springer, Germany, 2008.
  33. Daines, J. G.; Nimer, C. L. (2011). "Re-Imagining Archival Display: Creating User-Friendly Finding Aids". Journal of Archival Organization. 9 (1): 4–31. doi:10.1080/15332748.2011.574019. S2CID   56679506.
  34. M. Y. Eidson. "Describing Anything That Walks: The Problem Behind the Problem of EAD", Journal of Archival Organization 1(4) 5–28, 2002.
  35. Roth, J. (2011). "Serving Up EAD: An Exploratory Study on the Deployment and Utilization of Encoded Archival Description Finding Aids". The American Archivist. 64 (2): 214–237. doi:10.17723/aarc.64.2.e687471v304k0u66.
  36. Prom, C.J., Rishel, C.A., Schwartz, S.W., Fox, K.J. (2007). "A Unified Platform for Archival Description and Access". In: Proc. 7th ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL 2007), pp. 157–166. ACM Press, New York (2007)