Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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”
• 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>
