Reston, September 19 2000
description
Transcript of Reston, September 19 2000
Reston, September 19 2000
doi>
DOI Workshop: Future plans and progress
2
• First workshop since “full implementation”
• 37 people registered• IDF members, prefix holders, others
• Flexible agenda, open discussion
Metadata issues and DOI
3
• See www.doi.org for DOI Handbook• CD ROM (in folder) • IDF Annual Report 2000• Indecs document (re metadata
framework) • Further information
Documents
4
• Also available here for consultation : • DOI Handbook (printed)• Metadata background: BioImage, ONIX,
EPICS • Recent articles • etc• all available (or linked) from
www.doi.org
Documents
5
• DOI update /overview- break -
• Metadata issues: designing DOI genres- lunch -
• Resolution issues - break - • Deployment issues
• Whats needed; how to proceed; prototypes and practical next steps
Agenda
6
• What has been achieved?
• Where are we heading?
DOI: Review of progress
7
• Consistency: no major “U turns” • Progress: design and implementation• Engagement: wider and deeper
– metadata discussions – identifier issues
• “Development” and “Product”– “The road ahead” analogy
DOI: Review of progress
8
Standardstracking
Standardstracking
Full implementation
Full implementation
Initial implementation
Initial implementation
Single redirection
MetadataW3C, WIPO, NISO, ISO, etc, other initiativesMultiple resolution
A continuing development activity
DOI: development in three tracks
9
• Components of the DOI
DOI: Review of progress
10
• A number (or “name”)– assign a number to something– (compare: telephone number)
11
• A number (or “name”)– assign a number to something– (compare: telephone number)
• A description– what the number is assigned to– (compare: directory entry)
12
• 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)
13
• 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)
14POLICIES
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
15
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
16
Syntax 10.1234/5678
NUMBERING
ResolutionSystem able to link the number to somethinguseful
ACTION
17
Syntax 10.1234/5678
NUMBERING
ResolutionLink to one URL only
ACTION
18POLICIES
Any form of identifier
ENUMERATION
DESCRIPTION
<indecs> framework:DOI can describe any form of intellectual property, at any level of granularity
RESOLUTION
Handle System allows a DOI to link to any and multiple piecesof current data
doi>
19
• An extensible infrastructure, architecture– a firm basis for building consistent,
reliable, systems• More members, more prefixes, more DOIs
DOI: Review of progress
20
• a major implementation• other implementations near• more signs of influence:
– W3C; ISTC; E-Books• clear vision: “conceptual integrity”
(Brookes)
DOI: Review of progress
21
• 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?
22
• “If this stuff wasn’t difficult we wouldn’t be doing it”
• The first actionable identifier (all the components)
• Oct 1997 concept launched (simple form)• March 1998 IDF launched; two years of work• Some comparisons:
– URN (1991 -); DC (1994-); FRBR (1992-98); HDL (1994-); W3C (1994-); IMS (1996-); RosettaNet (1998-)
DOI: Time frame
23
• Crossref (PILA)– “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)
– see IDF “E-Citations” paper
• Images– BioImage; and extension?
DOI: Applications
24
• E-Books - working with: ONIX/EPICS; OEB; EBX and AAP E-
Books standards activity - community is diffuse and hence applications as yet undefined: eBooks (ISBN?); components; links?
• Instructional materials (NICEM)• Music industry • Others? E-News; Legal information; Patents;
“Grey literature”; etc. Applications will drive deployment
DOI: Applications (cont.)
25
• approach vindicated – See recent papers by Carl Lagoze; Priscilla Caplan
• practical implementation of <indecs> through ONIX/EPICS dictionary– extension/collaboration with other areas e.g.music/video;
SMPTE; MerchEnt; etc
• 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: Applications and metadata
26
• 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
27
• 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
28
• 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
29
• Review 1999: – DOI Current Status and Outlook May
1999• Review 2000• Handbook (DOI 10.1000/182) • Papers
– “DOI: implementing a standard ….” – “one to many” – etc
Documentation
30
• “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
Marketing
31
• Handle:– New release of second major version– Handle infrastructure improved – CNRI plans for Handle – Browser support: Mozilla, IE?
• Metadata, rights:– ONIX/EPICS etc implementing indecs – XrML
• W3C:– URI Activity – “intellectual property on the web” workshop
Other key activities
32
• 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
Other key activities (2)
33
• Workshops• Prototypes• New working groups (E mail lists)
proposed:– Handle/resolution– Identifiers/metadata– Information interchange
Community involvement
34
• 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
35
• 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
36
• Consistency: no major “U turns” • Progress: development and
implementation• Conceptual integrity• Practical results; and development • More to be done on advocacy • More to be done on applications,
developments - this workshop
DOI: Review of progress