National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Programs Fiscal Year 1994 (1994)
Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications (CPSMA)

Citation Manager

. "8 Computer Systems Laboratory." An Assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Programs Fiscal Year 1994. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1994.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
226
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


An Assessment of the NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS: Fiscal Year 1994

The current data integrity (care and handling) study for the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) will be the subject of a report to be published in the Fall 1994. NARA will be disseminating this report to the archivist community, and it will be widely available to industry and government agencies, including the optical disk standards community. (SP 500-101 on the care and handling of computer magnetic storage media was very widely distributed for 10 years and is still the subject of inquiries.)

Optical disk error monitoring and reporting work is the subject of American National Standards Institute/Association for Information and Image Management (AIIM) standard MS59-199X, which was on the AIIM ballot at the time of this assessment. The division played a key role in developing the ISO/IEC version of this standard. This work is jointly sponsored by NARA and two other federal agencies. Several manufacturers have indicated an intention to produce compliant products.

  • “. . . The division reports annually to the panel on what it can do given its expertise, funding sources, and time limitations. The division should also specify what it is not working on and why. . . .” (p. 237). CSL responded to the panel with a listing of programs it has chosen not to work on. However, the Advanced Systems Division does not appear to be systematically comparing its work agenda against its total range of choices. The panel reiterates the importance of this activity as part of the division's planning process.

Page
226