檔案控制層次分為管理、全宗、系列、案卷、件等五個層次，是由美國國家檔案暨文件署之學者Oliver Wendell Holmes在1964年提出「檔案編排-五種不同的控制層次」一文的說法。
從2001年起，國內各典藏歷史檔案機構已就其重要的歷史檔案，引進採用最新發展之「檔案描述編碼格式」(Encoded Archival Description，簡稱EAD)及「國際檔案描述標準」(General International Standard Archival Description，簡稱ISAD(G))等標準，進行數位典藏計畫，使檔案控制層次在歷史檔案編排之應用，成為數位典藏計畫執行期間及本研究階段之重要研究課題。
本研究採用「個案研究法」與「深度訪談法」進行研究，對5所典藏歷史檔案機構進行個案研究，包括：國立故宮博物院、國史館、國史館台灣文獻館、中央研究院歷史語言研究所及近代史研究所，以了解檔案控制層次之應用成果；另深度訪談法則是對機構內檔案編排人員進行訪談，以搜集參與數位典藏計畫前後，檔案控制層次在歷史檔案編排之應用情形資訊，及檔案描述有關之控制層次內容。
根據本研究，有下列結論：一、各機構均會參酌最新理論與應用先例進行檔案編排；二、對於檔案控制層次除運用在實體歷史檔案編排外，並也已逐漸延伸到數位檔案影像編排上；三、後設資料需求規格書中之控制層次名稱更為明確；四、控制層次邏輯可以作為製成檢索工具基礎及應用在數位檔案之檔名命名上；五、層次關係以樹狀結構呈現；六、多數機構著重在較低層次的描述；七、彙整出各機構檔案編排之層次圖表。
最後對前述研究結論提出建議：一、未將檔案控制層次運用在歷史檔案編排者，應加以調整；二、控制層次之名稱與內涵應一致；三、運用檔案控制層次方法後，應加以彙集出版或作為網路上瀏覽檔案的輔助索引；四、建立描述計畫時，應著重在較高層次的描述；五、各機構應加強訂定檔案描述規則與多層次描述規範。 / The levels of control in archival arrangement can be classified by depositories, fonds, series, files and items ,etc. This concept had been proposed by Oliver Wendell Holmes in 1964, in his article: “Archival Arrangement -- Five Different Operations at Five Different Levels”.
Since 2001, many public archive institutions which are major holders of historical materials in Taiwan, early or late participated in the “National Digital Archives Program” (NDAP). They have adopted “Encoded Archival Description” (EAD) and “General International Standard Archival Description” ( ISAD(G)) as the standards of archive digitization. Therefore, the levels of control applied in the arrangement of historical archives have become the main topics of NDAP and relative studies.
This study has adopted the “case study method” and the “in-depth interview method.” We make case studies of five major historical archive institutions in Taiwan -- the National Palace Museum, the Historica Academia, the Taiwan Historica, the Institute of History and Philology and the Institute of Modern History, especially regarding the levels of control applied in the arrangement of historical archives before and after these institutions participated in NDAP. On the other hand, we interviewed the archivists of the above institutions, in order to understand their work of archival description based on the levels of control.
We reached the following conclusions:
1. The above-mentioned institutions adopt the newly theory and practice in archival arrangement every now and again.
2. The levels of control not only have been applied in the arrangement of physical archives, but extended to digital archives.
3. The levels of control have become more definite in the specification of metadata requirement.
4. The logic of the levels of control can be utilized as the basis of finding aids and : the naming rule of digital files.
5. The hierarchical model of the levels of control has been presented in a kind of tree structure.
6. Most institutions focus their efforts on lower level descriptions.
7. For further research, we establish a summary table of the levels of control adopted by the above-mentioned institutions.
Finally, we do have some suggestions:
1. For every historical archive holder, it is a wise choice to adopt the levels of control to arrange the historical materials
2. The naming on the levels of control and its contents must be consistent.
3. The levels of control applied in the arrangement of historical materials should be available on-site to user as auxiliary index.
4. We’d better concentrate more efforts on higher level description while planning for archival description.
5. Each public archive institution should make every effort to enhance the establishment of Chinese archival description rules and multiple description specifications.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0911550041 |
| Creators | 葉美珠 |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds