DOI workshop

doi>

• Workshop covering “full implementation”

• Mix of IDF members, prefix holders, others (42 registrants)

• Flexible agenda, open discussion • E-Books as topical item

• Thanks to McGraw-Hill

DOI workshop

Workshop leaders/roles:

• Norman Paskin : IDF • Larry Lannom : CNRI • Mark Bide: indecs

• David Martin: ONIX • Steve Mooney: DOI E-Books prototype• Bob Bolick: AAP; IDF Board

DOI workshop

• See www.doi.org for DOI Handbook• CD ROM (in folder) • IDF Annual Report 2000• Indecs building blocks document

(re metadata framework)

• Further information

Documents

• Also available for consultation : • DOI Handbook (printed)• Metadata background: BioImage, ONIX,

EPICS • Recent articles • etc• all available (or linked) from

www.doi.org

Documents

• DOI overview and update

• Resolution issues: multiple resolution

• Metadata issues: designing DOI genres

• Registration Agencies

• Q&A

Agenda

• International DOI Foundation: founded 1998 – following demonstration of prototype in 1997

• Not-for-profit; paid membership support– similar principles to World Wide Web Consortium

• Open to all interested parties• Democratic: board elected from members• Full time staff (Director)• 40+ organisations (growing)

– Content owners (text publishers, music, etc )– Technology companies– Content intermediaries (etc)

DOI - organisation

• Establish a way of identifying content in the digital environment– actionable identifier

• Which can be the basis of rights management– extensible; can be developed further

DOI: aim

• Identification of content - intellectual property in any form - precisely identified

• Actionable identification - automation: click to do something

- services: things other than “get” • Interoperability, extensibility

• Open standard

DOI requirements

• Must be consistent and extensible:

• technology: changes – e.g. PC netC P2P …?; E-books; WAP

• multimedia: needed – e.g. music clip and image in E-Book with web update (“media convergence”)

• applications: cannot be known in advance

Key issue:

• What has been achieved?

• Where are we heading?

DOI - progress

• An extensible infrastructure– a firm basis for building consistent,

reliable, systems• More members, more prefixes, more DOIs

– 40 + IDF members supporting the work– 160 + users– 2 million + DOIs in full implementation

• “but is it real?”

DOI: Review of progress

“If this stuff wasn’t difficult, we wouldn’t be doing it”

• The first actionable, persistent, identifier• “Good cooking takes time”:

– URN (1991 -); DC (1994-); FRBR (1992-98); HDL (1994-); W3C (1994-); IMS (1996-); RosettaNet (1998-)

DOI: Time frame

• Full implementation available • Applications are being built

– CrossRef and others

• Commercial deployment: DOI registration agencies – CrossRef and others

• Technology support – Microsoft announcement

• Increased marketing is the next step

DOI: Review of progress

DOI: Timeline of progress

97 98 99 00

IDF

concept

Handbook

Scope, function

Need for metadata

CrossRef

today

Metadata solution

<indecs>

• Much detailed development • See “Annual Review 2000”• CD-ROM overview • Handbook on web site

– www.doi.org

DOI: Review of progress

doi>

ANNUAL REVIEW September 2000

The International DOI Foundation

• Consistency: no major “U turns” • Progress: design of full implementation• Engagement: wider and deeper

– metadata discussions – identifier issues

• “Development” and “Product”– Spreadsheet analogy

DOI review of progress

ActivitytrackingActivitytracking

Full implementation

Full implementation

Initial implementation

Initial implementation

Single redirection (persistent identifier)

Metadata W3C, WIPO, NISO, ISO, UDDI etc.Multiple resolution

A continuing development activity

DOI: development in three tracks

• A number (or “name”)– assign a number to something– (compare: telephone number)

DOI: components

• A number (or “name”)– assign a number to something– (compare: telephone number)

• A description– what the number is assigned to– (compare: directory entry)

DOI: components

• A number (or “name”)– assign a number to something– (compare: telephone number)

• A description– what the number is assigned to– (compare: directory entry)

• An action – make the number do something – (compare: the telephone

system)

DOI: components

• A number (or “name”)– assign a number to something– (compare: telephone number)

• A description– what the number is assigned to– (compare: directory entry)

• An action – make the number do something – (compare: the telephone system)

• Policies– how to get a phone number; billing

(compare: social structures)

DOI: components

Deployment POLICIES

Syntax 10.1234/5678

NUMBERING

DESCRIPTION

MetadataPieces of data which describe uniquely that which is identified

ResolutionSystem able to link the number to somethinguseful

ACTION

POLICIES

Any form of identifier

NUMBERING

DESCRIPTION

<indecs> framework:DOI can describe any form of intellectual property, at any level of granularity

ACTION

Handle resolution allows a DOI to link to any and multiple piecesof current data

doi>extensible

• STM • Rigorous approach • Technical • Anglo-American • Key individuals • Open development • Unifying

Advantages: and potential pitfalls

too identified with text,STM?

“theoretical”?not understandable?

not international?

in depth support?

not yet ready?fragmentation?

• CrossRef “CrossRef is the first practical demonstration of why the DOI is important, and how it can be used to improve Web publishing. Though it was implemented by journal publishers…the concept could be applied to other genres…” (Seybold Report, 14 June 2000)

• STM community was the first to take up DOI

DOI: Applications

• E-Books - working with ONIX; OEB; EBX and AAP E-

Books standards activities - community is new, diffuse. <OeB> role?

- DOI-EB prototype.

• Microsoft will implement native DOI (Handle) technology in Microsoft E-Book Reader

- Tens of millions of MS readers within 1 year • IDF also working to improve support in web

browsers (plug in)

DOI: Applications (cont.)

• Subsidiary Rights– DOI-R prototype with FBF and others?– Rights applications are key; this could be a

start– well-defined, current business practice

• Images – BioImage and others

DOI: Applications (cont.)

• Under active discussion:

• Audiovisual materials (NICEM)• Music industry (RIAA??)• News sector • Legal information; Patents; “Grey literature”;

cultural artefacts; etc.

• Applications will drive use

DOI: Applications (cont.)

• Metadata is key • approach vindicated

– See recent papers by Carl Lagoze; Priscilla Caplan• practical implementation of <indecs> through ONIX

– commercially deployed – extension/collaboration e.g.music/video

• documentation in detail: – Handbook (section 5, and appendices 2&5)– More detailed “template” for genres coming shortly

• mechanism for metadata (e.g. metadata@DOI 123…)– XML declarations; schemas

DOI: Metadata

• Technology is (relatively) easy• Basis for Deployment outlined (end of 1999)• Initial financial model (June): simple• First and second “wave” of interested parties• Terms document • Applications will drive deployment (genres

etc)

Commercial implementation: “deployment”

• more on this in next session • rights transactions• see latest indecs framework document • role of XrML to be investigated• “DOI-R” • proposed by analogy to DOI-X• scope problems• now looking at more defined prototype with FBF• Rights is not “just another application”

Extensibility: metadata framework

• Digital Object Architecture includes Handle, repositories, etc.– see papers by Kahn et al

• multiple resolution• workflow tools• repository:

– “stated operations” = DOI services?– genre definitions, schema, etc?

• public key infrastructure

Extensibility: digital object architecture

• “W3C approach” up to now: – don’t promise what can’t deliver; show by

example

• CD-ROM marks start of next wave– outreach and applications

DOI: marketing

• Handle:– New release of second major version– Handle infrastructure improved – CNRI plans for Handle – Browser support: Mozilla?

• Metadata, rights:– ONIX/EPICS etc implementing indecs – XrML

• W3C:– URI Activity – “intellectual property on the web” workshop

DOI: other key activities (1)

• Other intellectual property activities: – e.g. MPEG-21 as possible focus for cIDF,

SMPTE, etc.• Legacy identifiers (ISBN, ISSN, etc)

– common issues for identifiers• Work with new identifiers (e.g. ISTC; E-

books)• Major issue: mindshare support for standards

– avoid fragmentation

DOI: other key activities (2)

• Workshops• Prototypes• New working groups (E mail lists)

proposed:– Handle/resolution– Identifiers/metadata– Information interchange

Community involvement

• genres: articulation and development– metadata declarations

• multiple resolution: services– Service@DOI:10.1000/182– e.g. Rights@DOI:10.1000/182 (YBP, 1998)– e.g Metadata@…..

* Services will drive applications• rights * Rights services will drive killer apps• outreach to i.p. communities• commonality of identifier/ metadata/ i.p.issues

communities

The future

• To be investigated:• Metadata pointer for all DOIs (kernel)• XML schema for genre metadata• List of other desired services and policies• Registry of “data types” = service (and

tools)• Registry of genres• Tools to make all this easier

Multiple resolution: services

• A consistent extensible system – which works now – is interoperable with other standards

• Supported by the publishing industry – publishers, and intermediaries

• Strong support from technology community – Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, and others

• Not a proprietary solution – owned by the community (anyone can join)– available at cost

DOI: so what have we got?

• extensible framework can cope with anything we want it to do – spreadsheet analogy

• requires logical framework for identification, metadata (indecs)

• requires prototypes, – DOI-X, DOI-EB, DOI-R, etc

• requires software developers to adopt– Microsoft E-Book reader, etc

• requires thinking (business requirements) !

So: