I have a few problems with this:
"Storing data with Piql achieves OAIS (ISO 14721) compliance and is as easy to use as any other digital technology, but with a unique security, integrity and longevity." (Thread coming) https://www.piql.com/resource/preservation-of-manuscripts-for-the-hungarian-national-library/

I get that there are use cases for storing digitized manuscripts / information on film. And keeping it safe in an Arctic Vault. I really do.
However .... we all know that there are also plenty of use cases (which most of us deal with every day) where this doesn't work.

Cases, where data needs to be accessed frequently, cases where information is stored in a non-linear non-purely-visual form. Which can also be features attributed to what we have come to call "documents"

and yes ... even PDF isn't necessarily only linear and purely-vsiual, PDF has moved (not just per-standard/theoretical, but also as per-use/practical) far beyond digital-paper and we need to come to accept that.

so, considering the diff use cases which lead to diff approaches ranging from "store it on film in an arctic vault" to "keep it on spinning disk in active preservation management" (and that's just bit-level thinking ...add any other layer on top)...are they really the same thing?

is there a risk associated with calling the full spectrum of solutions:
- "OAIS compliant"?
- "digital preservation"?
- "sustainable storage"?

while we can argue whether solutions are or aren't dp, there is real damage being done here. storing "data" on a long-lived medium like film in an arctic vault is a calcuatable yearly line-item with no financial risk associated.

no people needed. no sw licenses needed. even documentation is a 1-time effort. that sounds fabulous to management. who then turn around and ask why we spend so much time and effort on digital preservation? when in fact, it could be so easy and without the price tag?

And look, the brochure says:
"Libraries carry an important responsibility to ensure valuable information lives on for decades and even centuries. (...)

"(...) This can be a difficult task with challenges such digital obsolescence, multiple file formats, content duplication, both analogue and born digital information and resource constraints."

Again, I blieve that if we pick everything in the report apart word for word, there is still nothing wrong said there. IMO the problem is that we have not reached a better refinement / description / awareness for what we do with "active preservation".