diff --git a/getting-started/index.rst b/getting-started/index.rst index 53e5f4c0..f93f3a80 100644 --- a/getting-started/index.rst +++ b/getting-started/index.rst @@ -20,4 +20,3 @@ of links to each chapter's main sections. troubleshooting/error-handling troubleshooting/error-reporting troubleshooting/faq - other-resources/trac diff --git a/getting-started/other-resources/trac.rst b/getting-started/other-resources/trac.rst deleted file mode 100644 index 24353884..00000000 --- a/getting-started/other-resources/trac.rst +++ /dev/null @@ -1,138 +0,0 @@ -.. _trac: - -================ -TRAC review tool -================ - -The Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification (TRAC) review tool is a -Drupal implementation of the TRAC checklist, an auditing tool to assess the -reliability, commitment and readiness of institutions to assume long-term -preservation responsibilities. - -The review tool was developed by MIT in a project led by Nancy McGovern, -Director, Digital Preservation at MIT Libraries. Artefactual has -permission to host this tool for community use. The copy provided here contains -data about the TRAC requirements that Archivematica fulfills for the repository. - -Installation ------------- - -* Download link: https://www.archivematica.org/download/trac.tar.gz - -Instructions for installation: - -* Be sure to consult the README.txt and README_TRAC.txt files in the tarball - prior to installation. - -Summary -------- - -The following text is slightly edited from the home page of the Drupal TRAC -Review site. - -The home page of the site provides an overview of an organization's efforts to -document its evidence for meeting the requirements of the CCSDS Audit and -Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories `checklist`_ that was approved -as ISO 16363 and is based on Trustworthy Repositories Audit and Certification -(TRAC): Criteria and Checklist that was released in January 2007. A TRAC review -is a self-assessment method for an organization to demonstrate good practice and -conformance as a trusted digital repository to its designated communities and -prepare for a peer review or other external audit. In many organizations, -responsibilities for TRAC compliance are distributed throughout the -organization, with specific units and committees having certain responsibilities -for each requirement. - -Responsibilities -^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ - -Each entity is assigned a role for each requirement using the RACI -responsibility assignment `matrix`_. - -The RACI Matrix describes participation by various organizational roles in -completing tasks for a project. RACI is especially useful in clarifying roles -in projects and processes requiring distributed responsibilities. See the -Responsibilities for TRAC page of the Drupal site for more information on RACI -responsibilities, and a listing of units and committees that have roles in -TRAC conformance. - -In each requirement where Archivematica provides all or part of the evidence, -the Operations Group is identified as one of the Responsible parties. Other -organizational roles indicated are simply suggestions. - -Requirements -^^^^^^^^^^^^ - -In the site, each TRAC requirement has its own page. Sub- and Sub-sub -requirements are referred to on the relevant high-level requirement page. -Current compliance with TRAC requirements is assessed on a rating system from -0 to 4: - -* 4 = fully compliant - the repository can demonstrate that has - comprehensively addressed the requirement - -* 3 = mostly compliant - the repository can demonstrate that it has mostly - addressed the requirement and is on working on full compliance - -* 2 = half compliant - the repository has partially addressed the requirement - and has significant work remaining to fully address the requirement - -* 1 = slightly compliant - the repository has something in place, but has a - lot of work to do in addressing the requirement - -* 0 = non-compliant or not started - the repository has not yet addressed the - requirement or has not started the review of the requirement - -Any group in the organization that is involved in defining policy and practice -should update the status of relevant requirements. When listing evidence, -please include sufficient information for reviewers to get to the cited -evidence (e.g., a document title, date, a link) and note the name of the group -or department that is adding an entry to the evidence addressing the -requirement along with the date of the annotations (e.g., [Right Management -group, 2/13/2013]). (Note that for requirements where Archivematica provides -all or part of the evidence, no date or group is specified as this evidence -must be reviewed and assigned a responsible group per repository) For -additional guidance, please see the Responsibilities for TRAC page of the -site. - -Status -^^^^^^ - -The site provides a sequence of status levels for each requirement: - -* Accepted – the evidence provided has been accepted as sufficient for this - review round - -* Ready for review – the Responsible group has completed its work and the - evidence is ready for review - -* In progress – the Responsible group is in the process of compiling or - generating relevant evidence - -* Not started – no evidence or information has been provided yet - -For requirements where Archivematica provides all or part of the evidence, the -status is indicated as In Progress as it should still be reviewed, edited, -and/or completed by the repository. - -Support -------- - -Artefactual will not be providing free support for this tool. However, we -encourage users to discuss it using our `public discussion list`_. - -If you have questions about an internal review that are unrelated to this -tool, contact the `NDSA Standards and Practices Working Group`_. - -Thanks ------- - -Artefactual is grateful to Nancy McGovern and Matt Bernhardt of MIT for their -work towards the development of this tool and for allowing us to host it for -community consumption here on the Archivematica website. - -:ref:`Back to the top ` - -.. _`checklist`: https://public.ccsds.org/pubs/652x0m1.pdf -.. _`matrix`: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matrix -.. _`public discussion list`: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/archivematica -.. _`NDSA Standards and Practices Working Group`: http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/ndsa/NDSAtoDLF.html diff --git a/index.rst b/index.rst index 99e749a8..3d4aa891 100644 --- a/index.rst +++ b/index.rst @@ -67,13 +67,6 @@ errors, as well as how to report errors * :ref:`Error reporting ` * :ref:`FAQ ` -.. _home-other-resources: - -Other resources ---------------- - -* :ref:`TRAC review tool ` - .. _user-manual-home: User manual