doi update 2001 doi> doi commercial implementations

DOI Update 2001

doi>

“DOI commercial implementations”

Digital Object Identifier

Commercial implementations

doi>DOI Update 2001

Standards for identification (DOI)

Standards for linking (CrossRef)

Standards for product information (ONIX)

Standards for subsidiary rights (FBF)

Standards for E-Books (AAP/Andersen)

Last year: Trading in the digital environment

Key issues for us all

• Standards for linking, product information, rights, E- books, …

• …are all the same problem

• Publishers want seamless flow of data:- within the company- with outside parties- for independent access to their content

- interoperable data for e-commerce

doi>

Standards for identification (DOI)

Standards for linking (CrossRef)

Standards for product information (ONIX)

Standards for subsidiary rights(FBF)

Standards for E-Books (AAP/Andersen)

Last year: Trading in the digital environment

This year: • DOI implementations

• in a number of product areas

Showing how DOI can apply to all of these needs

• DOI update on progress Norman Paskin

• DOIs and journal publishing Ed Pentz, CrossRef

• DOIs and book publishing David Sidman, CDI

• [DOIs and non-English language publishing] see Enpia Systems stand 1.1 L 1105 (Korea)

• DOIs and learning objects John Purcell, LON

• DOIs and rights management Norman Paskin

• Summary, Q&A

This year: DOI implementations doi>

Financing Possibilities for Digital Content 15.00 - 17.00 Europa Room Hall 4.0

European Commission eContent ProgrammeDG Information Society Directorate D

• The Information Society: European digital content• 3rd Generation telecoms for content delivery• Personalised information services• 3rd Generation online service: newspaper content

Cocktails at 17.00

This afternoon - related meeting on eContent

• An overall view • Some topics will receive greater detail later

today• A higher level perspective

– a picture of the year– a summary of (+) and (-)– more details on some highlights

Progress report doi>

Information Identification - IPA/STM ; Uniform File Identifiers - AAP (1995)• “..need to unify in one scheme music, audiovisual, document management, internet engineering, digital libraries, copyright registration and object based software”• “..maximise utility of digital objects; enable core interoperability; enable integration of disparate sourced data; ability to trace ownership to manage rights”• requirements:

– protect legacy investments– enable interoperability– provide link between digital and physical– maintain privacy of users– have persistence– standard syntax– global scalability– global uniqueness– global meaning

doi>

DOI delivers all this

A consistent call by the publishing industry

• A persistent identifier • Structured metadata • Interoperable • To facilitate the use of publisher's

material in a legal, controllable and easy to manage way

DOI doi>

DOI: Timeline of progress - to last meeting

97 98 99 00

IDF

concept

IDF Seattle

Scope, function

Need for metadata

CrossRef

Metadata solution

<indecs>

FBF

DOI: Timeline of progress - since last update

CrossRef as RA

Open URL/local copy work begins

Open E Book Standards recommends DOIPLS paper calls for DOI

Some key events

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

DOI: Timeline of progress - since last update

Additional staff

DOI Handbook version 1 released

Some key events

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

DOI E-Book activity begins

Seybold comments; SIIA paper; News@DOI

CDI as RA

Enpia as RA

Multi-resolution “roll out”

DOI-NS data dictionary

Indecs2 RDD

IDF Bristol

doi>Priorities for 2001

Stated priorities were:

• Marketing: get the message out

• Firm up, and scale up, the operational foundations: make commercial – (1) Generic tools, (2) RA appointments

• “Business development” - expansion to other sectors, applications

• Fit into the bigger picture: Rights, etc– as much as possible, by leveraging other efforts rather

than doing it ourselves: indecs 2, interparty, Handle AC

• Several RAs now appointed (CrossRef, CDI, Enpia)– CrossRef proven, successful: real – More RAs on the way– Asian interest

• Consistent development and deepening of functionality (Handbook, Namespace, EB, SDI) and business model

• Excellent “reviews” and perception • More links with other sectors, other initiatives • More is happening (more participation)• Have delivered on our promise

Summary: what can be happy about? doi>

• 4 million DOIs• 8 million resolutions last month

Summary: what can be happy about? doi>

• Funding not keeping pace with activities– growing, but not as fast as planned – we have had to cut back on efforts– new members, but also existing non-renewals:

economic climate (esp TMT) now biting– not deep enough (text/technology sectors)

• Slower than desired expansion:– not broad enough (non-text sectors): significant

interest but not $• Still some misperceptions

– Seen as neither “a standards organisation” nor “a commercial solution”

• “killer plumbing”: infrastructure a hard sell

Summary: what are the problems? doi>

• The problems are short term– We can overcome them given

commitment• The progress is consistent

– We are maintaining steady expansion– We have real applications

Summary: doi>

doi>Membership development

• Several small companies (E Books) committed through DOI-EB working group, but unable to follow through

• Increase in non-renewals recently– "We think it's very good - but we have budget constraints"

• Introduced Affiliate participation fee ($5K)– Working groups for specific interests

• Difficult sell in current environment– “It’s a great thing, and we’ll use it - but not fund it”– CFOs want cuts

• The co-operation paradox; long term gain versus short term cuts

The Industry Standard, May 28 2001

The "X" in What's Next• But Forrester may be doing more than just trying to unhitch itself from the crazy train of the

Web. In some ways, the veteran research firm's latest move shows the analyst business at its finest: giving the industry a rosy spot on the horizon to focus on, a clever name for that spot and a forecast with lots of zeroes in it to throw investors and entrepreneurs into a frenzy.

The Industry Standard, May 28 2001

1. Resource implications 2. Continuing effort

• Standards must be developed for the long term. – Short term fixes won’t do.

• standards are not simple conventions:• publishing standards are now technical standards

Key issues for us all:

$

investment

doi>

“One of the most important things a formal property system does is transform assets from a less accessible condition to a more accessible condition, so that they can do additional work. Unlike physical assets, representations are easily combined, divided, mobilized, and used to stimulate business deals. By uncoupling the economic features of an asset from their rigid, physical state, a representation makes the asset "fungible" - able to be fashioned to suit practically any transaction.”

doi>Our aim: Building infrastructure

“The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Succeeds in the West and Fails Everywhere Else” by Hernando de Soto (2000)

Membership supports Operations, until the operations are self-sustaining

We must accelerate the planned move towards self-sustaining operations

• More members• More applications / Registration Agencies• Other sources of funding

Our challenge doi>

doi>Priorities for 2001

Stated priorities were:

• Marketing: get the message out

• Firm up, and scale up, the operational foundations: make commercial – Namespace tools, RA appointments

• “Business development” - expansion to other sectors, applications

• Fit into the bigger picture: Rights, etc– as much as possible, by leveraging other efforts rather

than doing it ourselves: indecs 2, interparty, Handle AC

• “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)

Marketing: Perceptions and feedback doi>

• E-Books: AAP Open E-Book Standards Project recommends DOI, ISBN (27 Nov 2000)

• “the endorsement of DOI by book publishers is a big boost to DOI, which until now has been embraced by the journal community and largely ignored by everyone else. DOI makes a lot of sense, not only for protecting copyright but also for creating links to published material whose URL may not be known (e.g. because it's in a database or protected by firewall). Perhaps if magazine, newspapers and yes, even Web-only publishers, take notice, we could begin to see a consistent document-identification scheme implemented worldwide." (Seybold Report, 29 November 2000)

Perceptions and feedback doi>

• Links to all these at http://www.doi.org/recent_press.html

• We have not seen ANY critical reviews

• There are still some misperceptions

Perceptions and feedback doi>

doi>Priorities for 2001

Stated priorities were:

• Marketing: get the message out

• Firm up, and scale up, the operational foundations: make commercial – (1) General functionality tools, (2) RA appointments

• “Business development” - expansion to other sectors, applications

• Fit into the bigger picture: Rights, etc– as much as possible, by leveraging other efforts rather

than doing it ourselves: indecs 2, interparty, Handle AC

doi>Functionality: Tools for metadata

• DOI-Namespace: a data dictionary structured on <indecs> principles, with controlled values for "DOI-Application Profiles".

• Publication of this data dictionary in a format that allows developers access to it

• Design of a process for continuing maintenance • Integration of this with real RA use; ONIX etc.• Development of a “metadata registry” for automated

online interoperability is likely to be the ultimate outcome (ONIX/DC/MARC/SCORM etc)

• Much work done - more to be done• Discussions underway with potential partners

doi>Functionality: “Default RA”

• Development of our in-house Registration Agency function

• Currently CNRI, who have helped with getting RAs off the ground.

• Need to add, to DOI deposit, the metadata management functions

• Develop this in such a way that:– we have control over it– it does not compete with RAs but aids them– it does not become “the” RA– it might be available to others “in a box” ($)

• It is usable for in-house experimentation

doi>Functionality: DOI Services

• “One to many: DOI Discussion paper“ : DOI is an actionable identifier: clicking on a DOI achieves some action.

• In the initial implementation, this is a single action: clicking on a DOI takes a user to one URL. We refer to this as "one-to-one".

• "One-to-many" implies one DOI may be used to achieve many possible actions. This is the aim of the full DOI implementation.

• Approaches: – DOI-EB making use of multiple resolution– DOI- Service Definition Interface

DOI-EB

demo by

doi>Priorities for 2001

Stated priorities were:

• Marketing: get the message out

• Firm up, and scale up, the operational foundations: make commercial – General functionality tools, RA appointments

• “Business development” - expansion to other sectors, applications

• Fit into the bigger picture: Rights, etc– as much as possible, by leveraging other efforts rather

than doing it ourselves: indecs 2, interparty, Handle AC

• Learning Objects• Music recording industry (MI3P)• Broadcasting (TV Anytime, SMEF) • Others on the active list: cIDF; News;

Patents; Datasets; museums

• Working groups (see web site) engage members and affiliates in practical development work in areas of interest

Likely opportunities doi>

doi>Priorities for 2001

Stated priorities were:

• Marketing: get the message out

• Firm up, and scale up, the operational foundations: make commercial – (1) General functionality tools, (2) RA appointments

• “Business development” - expansion to other sectors, applications

• Fit into the bigger picture: Rights, etc– as much as possible, by leveraging other efforts rather

than doing it ourselves: indecs 2, interparty, Handle AC

Consistent and growing support– consistent: good core support retention rate– growing: but not enough “depth and width”– not deep enough: why so few publishers?– not wide enough: non-text sectors– widespread: good international spread

Current strategy... doi>...is broadly correct

When implemented, it is used– CrossRef, CDI, Enpia– Total DOIs, prefixes, hits all growing

RA interest– others are in pipeline – a slow process? (but in line with plan so far)

Informed evaluation and endorsement – from some key players– but not yet enough

Current strategy doi>

Comprehensive (=extensible)We have the tools• DOI is an implementation of, and builds on: • Numbering: principles of unique identification • Description: INDECS analysis

– implementations e.g. ONIX– principles for interoperable data in e-commerce

• Action: Handle System – digital object architecture

• Policies: existing proven concepts – learn from e.g. ISBN, EAN/UPC, Visa

doi>Current strategy

• what can be happy about? – Real applications and use – 3 RAs now appointed– proven, successful: real – Expansion into Asia – Consistent development– Excellent “reviews”– Growing interest in other sectors

• what are the problems? – Funding not keeping pace with activities: membership growth,

but not as fast as planned – economic climate (esp TMT) now biting– slower than desired expansion to non-text sectors – still some misperceptions

Summary doi>

DOI Update 2001

doi>

“DOI commercial implementations”

Further information

doi>

Norman Paskin The International DOI Foundationn.paskin@doi.org http://www.doi.org

• DOI update on progress Norman Paskin

• DOIs and journal publishing Ed Pentz, CrossRef

• DOIs and book publishing David Sidman, CDI

• [DOIs and non-English language publishing] see Enpia Systems stand 1.1 L 1105

• DOIs and learning objects John Purcell, LON

• DOIs and rights management Norman Paskin

• Summary, Q&A

DOI implementations doi>