• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.223-245
• /
• 2016

Previously, the International Council of Archives (ICA) provided the General International Standard Archival Description (ISAD(G)) and the International Standard Archival Authority Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons and Families (ISAAR(CPF)) for the systematic archival description by the Committee on Best Practice and Standards. Recently, the new conceptual model and ontology, which is called "Record in Context" (RIC), is being developed by the ICA Experts Group on Archival Description (EGAD). For developing the new archival standard, ICA EGAD has referenced the archival standards of Australia, Spain, and Finland, as well as the FRBRoo integrated model of the museum and library fields and the legacy ICA's descriptive standards. This study, therefore, examined these international trends on the archival descriptive standards and derived a number of suggestions for improvement. As a result, descriptive standards are changing from the guidelines for the standardized archival description to the upper conceptual model and ontology for the flexible archival description and sharing of archival metadata. There is a need to adapt the change of the information environment and promote cooperation among cultural heritage institutions.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.81-109
• /
• 2017

This study suggests an analysis of the reviews provided by international archival professionals on the RiC-CM draft published by ICA EGAD. Some implications for the Korean archival management environment were also suggested. Some professional reviews were accessible through the internet. Italian archival professionals held workshops at various levels for the analysis and discussion of the draft. Duranti, the project director of InterPARES, also gave opinions about the draft in cluding the perspective of digital preservation. In the review of Artefactual, the draft was discussed in terms of system implementation. Reed, the director of Recordkeeping Innovation, also gave a feedback based on the record management experiences in Australia. Some implications can be suggested based on these professional opinions. First, we should try to build a test bed for the adoption of RiC to archival description in the Korean environment. Second, a minimum level of data elements that can secure authenticity and integrity will also be needed. Third and lastly, rich authority data for agents and functions related to archival records and records groups are essential to take full advantage of the standard.