"Digital asset management systems (DAMS) have become important tools for collecting, preserving, and disseminating digitized and born digital content to library patrons." This article looks at why institutions are migrating to other systems and in what direction. Often migrations happen as libraries refine their needs. The literature on the migration process and the implications is limited; this article provide several case studies of repository migration.A presentation by Lisa Gregory "demonstrated the important role digital preservation plays in deciding to migrate from one DAMS to another and reiterated the need for preservation issues and standards to be incorporated into the tools and best practices used by librarians when implementing a DAMS migration". Repository migration gives institutions the opportunity to move from one type of repository, such as home grown or proprietary, to another type. Some of the reasons that institutions migrated to other repositories (by those ranked number 1) are:
- Implementation & Day-to-Day Costs
- Content Management
- Metadata Standards
For metadata, they wanted the new system to support multiple metadata schema; administrative, preservation, structural, and/or technical metadata standards; local and user created metadata, and linked data. In addition, METS and PREMIS were highly desirable.
The new system should support, among others:
- Ability to create modules/plugins/widgets/APIs, etc.
- Support DOIs and ORCIDs
- generate checksum values for ingested digital assets.
- perform fixity verification for ingested digital assets.
- assign unique identifiers for each AIP
- support PREMIS or local preservation metadata schema.
- produce AIPs.
- integrate with other digital preservation tools.
- synchronize content with other storage systems (including off site locations).
- support multiple copies of the repository — including dark and light (open and closed) instances.