The PersID projectThe PersID projectMeta (Global) Resolver Service InfrastructureMeta (Global) Resolver Service Infrastructure

www.persid.org

Maurizio LunghiFondazione Rinascimento Digitale

Bonn 1 Feb 2011

1

• There will not be a worldwide dominant PI system, so the challenge is the interoperability among the major PI systems

• Technology is not the most important challenge – but agreed policies and governance (preferably under control of the international research, scholarly and cultural heritage communities)

• It is necessary to provide (future) services to stakeholders in the (changing) research and scholarly processes and information exchanges

…. Knowledge Exchange Consortium & Surf Agencypromoted a joint initiative ….

2

Rationale

Objectives• To set up a European infrastructure to resolve the URNs

particularly in the NBN namespace

• To establish a policy for long term sustainability of an

international resolution and discovery service

• To define an interoperability framework among URN

namespaces and different PI systems

• To review & update the related URN RFCs

3

Trust-based – National Libraries are responsible for the management of the namespaces

In use – several relevant initiatives are implementing NBN

Open & Flexible – suitable for different user communities (cultural,

scientific, private ..)

– caters for various needs and requirements (e.g. selection criteria, rights management, etc ..)

– enables different architectures to share responsibility and sustainability

4

Why NBN?

Around 7 countries (and other are coming) have decided to set up

a unique point of presence for their NBN national registers.

User Requirements and cooperation with Europeana Connect in

order to avoid overlapping and competition. Many other initiatives

have been contacted for cooperation.

First prototype of the Meta Resolver offering a unique entry point

for all the 7 countries NBN national registers.

Sustainability policy and costs models analysis and proposal are

expected soon. 5

Outcoming results - I

6

Outcoming results - II

PersID

NBN DE

NBN ITNBN NL

NBN FIN

NBN answer for any country

NBN:DE:IZA:12345

NBN:IT:FRD:12345

The IETF in a meeting in Maastricht on 26 July 2010 decided to set up a workgroup to revise 3 RFT about URN, on the base of the activity developed by the PersID, with three tasks:

• Revision of RFC 2141 (URN Syntax) and RFC 2483 (URN service)

• Revision of RFC 3188 (Using National Bibliography Numbers as

Uniform Resource Names)

• Evaluation of all the other URN-related RFCs, in order to decide if

there is a need to revise them

7

PersID & IETFRevision of RFCs

Danmarks Elektroniske Fag og Forskningsbibliotek - Denmark's Electronic Research Library (DEFF)

Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche - National Research Council (CNR), Italy

Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS), Netherlands

Deutsche Nationalbibliothek - German National Library

Det Kongelige Bibliotek - The Royal Library, Denmark

Kungliga biblioteket - National Library of Sweden

Fondazione Rinascimento Digitale (FDR), Italy

Kansalliskirjasto - National Library of Finland

SURFfoundation, Netherlands

Knowledge Exchange

8

Participants

9

APARSENNetwork of Excellence – 4 years

WP2200 Identifiers and Citability

Weak points: a lot of initiatives are on-going but fragmented A unique PI technology or domain cannot be expected/imposed

to all the user communities so we must manage heterogeneity Added value services tailored on different user communities,

like resolvers, are still inadequate and there are not cross-sectoral services

Goals To provide an overview of the current PI systems/applications

by different user communities and criteria for evaluation model to benchmark

To design a reference model to describe an interoperability framework and provide an integrated entry point

To define community-driven added value services cross-user-domains and applicable to different PI technologies

10

Thanks for your attention

Maurizio Lunghilunghi@rinascimento-digitale.it

11

Persistence is a contract with the user community

Persistence is a matter of Trustworthiness

Maurizio Lunghi, Emanuele Bellini, Chiara Cirinnà

12

Persistence is a matter of trustworthiness

The cloud of Persistent identifiers

epc

IETFPIN

OIDISSN

NEWSML

XMLORG

OASISpublicid

ISBN

MPEG

NBNWEB3D

IPTC

Mace

fipa

swift

liberty

UUID

UCI

CLEItva

fdcISAN

NZL

S1000D

nfc

Smptegeant

ISIL

serviceogc

3gpp

cgi

ebu

iso

dvb IVISOma

epcglobal

DOI PURL

HandleXMPP

LSIDARK

13

Persistence is a matter of trustworthiness

Trusted Persistent identifiers

Trusted: No identifier is trustable and stable ‘per-se’ all characteristics included trust ability depend by the authority and the trustworthiness of the organisations and the community implementing that specific service.

Persistent: The only guarantee of the usefulness and persistence of identifier systems is the commitment shown by the organisations who assign, manage and resolve the identifiers.

Identifiers: The Identifier concept is strictly related to the association between an alphanumeric string and the object identified. Before assigning an identifier we must select the digital content for long term use. An identifier for a digital content is like an identity card for a person.

14

Persistence is a matter of trustworthiness

Persistent identifiers consideration

- There are a lot of identifiers (some don’t have a resolution service associated yet) and there is no general agreement on what PI have to be adopt in a community (e.g. Humanities community)

- Sometimes the implementation of identification services follow mainly a technical approach neglecting for instance political and administrative point of view.

“The persistence is a matter of service (Kunze)”.. yes.. but it is crucial define some parameters and/or guidelines in order to design and evaluate the appropriateness of this service…

- The mission of a PI system it is not the mere identification (from this point of view a cool-URI could be sufficient) but the certification of the resource, their authority, their belonging to a specific community (library, audiovisual, etc), the standardization, etc.

15

Persistence is a matter of trustworthiness

General Evaluation Criteria of Trusted Persistent Identifers

1. Scope

2. Global & Standard

3. Resolvable

4. Reliable

5. Sustainable

16

Persistence is a matter of trustworthiness

1) Scope

1.1 What types of resourcesThe community must first of all identify clearly what an identifier can refer to, real, digital, abstract objects, what material they want to organise and structural relations, they must also define the use they need to implement also in future.

1.2 FlexibilityAn identifier system is more effective if it is able to accommodate the special requirements of different types of material or collection within a user community. The granularity, that refers to the level of detail at which persistent identifiers has to be assigned, must be taken into account.

General Evaluation Criteria of Trusted Persistent Identifers

17

Persistence is a matter of trustworthiness

2) Global & StandardWe consider the identifier as a unique label that is associated with a single object in a certain context. This context have to be well defined and regulated by reliable institutions recognised by the user community. Moreover the resolution to multi targets should be only related to different location of the same object instead of for instance to different versions. A local identifier is clearly not suitable. The adoption of a open standard allows the interoperability, wide adoption, well authority, resource production control, etc.

3) ResolvablePI systems must be at least ‘resolvable’ in terms of the possibility to have info-data about a named resource through the domain-resolver. Some PI systems are ‘actionable’ that means they use a resolution protocol like the URL for the effective access to the resource. In any case some additional added value services about the resource would be welcome.

General Evaluation Criteria of Trusted Persistent Identifers

18

Persistence is a matter of trustworthiness

4) Reliability (the actual contract with the users community)

4.1 AuthorityThe authority of a PI is derived by the authority and credibility of the Naming Assign Authority (NAA) and the Naming Mapping Authority (NMA). Moreover, the ‘authority’ has to be recognised to an institution by the user community.

4.2 Policy The NAA in cooperation with the related user community has to define responsibilities and criteria for accreditation of content provider (es. University digital library). Some of these criteria are referred to the type of policies adopted by content providers for their own repositories. They are important to define the pertinence of that policies in the perspective of to adopt a PI solution It is necessary to establish specific agreements between the NAA and content provider in relation to: content selection, digital preservation global policies, etc.

General Evaluation Criteria of Trusted Persistent Identifers

19

Persistence is a matter of trustworthiness

4.3 Robustness of service infrastructureThis issue should be faced in relation to a specific community requirements and defined by a Service Level Agreement. Each community has to define its own SLA for naming infrastructure.For instance the resolution service must be always granted via some redundancy strategies that can be different for each community. The register with names association must to be updated but a community can define the frequency of updating; the delay of resolution response should be defined by the user community requirements as well.

5) SustainableAs we said before, ‘sustainability’ depends on the user community will (interest) of using that material now and in future: a PI system is only a minor part of a trusted digital repository for example. The naming service must have a long term sustainable policy and business model in order to assure the ‘persistence’ service promised to users. Its concerns evaluation of costs, technology solutions, standard adoptions, political decisions, etc.

20

General Evaluation Criteria of Trusted Persistent Identifiers

url?URN

P2P

Richiesta di risoluzionedi URN:NBN:xxx-yyyy

Registro centrale

Istituzione1

Depositolegale

depositoRegistro

risoluzione

RegistroCentrale

risoluzione

SincronizzazioneOAI-PMH

URL /

url?URN

P2P

URL/

url?URN

PDF PDFURL /PDF

PDF

Istituzione1

depositoRegistro

risoluzione

Istituzione N

depositoRegistro

risoluzione

url?URN url?URN

URL /