Digital Object Identifier Norman Paskin International DOI Foundation

Digital Object Identifier Norman Paskin, International DOI Foundation doi>

What is DOI? doi> Digital Object Identifier • A unique identifier for "a piece of content“ on digital networks • Digital object interoperability

Analogy: the physical bar code doi> • A unique identifier for "a piece of content" in the physical world • single, common tool: UPC/EAN Bar Code • many uses : once assigned, usable by anyone in chain • wide community support made it work • self-sustaining cost recovery model etc. • standard – helps to integrate systems efficiently

The EAN/UPC (bar) code: more than just a quick way to get through the checkout line Manufacturer Distributor Receiving Just-in-Time Ordering Store Unique product identifier also used across supply chain for: - Billing/Payments - Sales Tracking Inventory computer - Financial Reporting - # goods shipped - sales by store or region - etc. Cash register Financial systems Head Office

Don't we have identifiers already? doi> • SKUs etc are not "actionable" consistently – (They can be included in a DOI) • URL is a Location – DOI is a Name (URI, URN); things move, may be at multiple places • Interoperability is KEY – Horizontal: across media – Vertical: across supply chain intermediaries • Need to do more than just "locate" – (Web) services; rights management • Need to be independent of platform – Web, mobile, broadcast, other networks

What is the DOI? doi> "The DOI is the UPC (Bar Code) for objects of intellectual property on the Internet. ” • 1. Uniquely identifies content - therefore enables computers to execute transactions of all kinds • 2. Provides a stable, persistent link to the content itself or to services • 3. Can be used to automate services

How? doi> • Show DOI as combination of components – use existing standards • Show examples of services (applications) built on DOI – Examples here web –based but DOI applies to all platforms

Numbering Policies doi> Description Action

DOI syntax can include any existing identifier, formal or informal, of any entity • • An identifier “container” e. g. 10. 1234/5678 10. 1234/0 -7645 -4889 -1 10. 1234/978 -0 -7645 -4889 -1 10. 1234/ISBN 0764548891 10. 1234/Norman_presentation 10. 1234/2002 -10 -08 -Editeur etc

• Metadata • Kernel metadata – Normalised using indecs DD – ISO identifiers adopting same approach? • Application profile metadata – Mapped using indecs. DD <indecs> framework: DOI can describe any form of intellectual property, at any level of granularity • Any existing schema (ONIX, SCORM, MARC, GRID…) • Standard way of accessing – “Hooks” to Open URL, UDDI, etc • XML expressions

• Resolve from DOI to: – – – Location (URL) - persistence Multiple locations Metadata Services Nested DOIs (related objects etc) Extensible: new types • Standard internet protocol • Scalable, proven • In use elsewhere Handle resolution allows a DOI to link to any & multiple pieces of current data

DOI policies allow any business model for practical implementations • Common rules of the road (IDF) – Governance and agreed scope, policy, rules • Cost-recovery (self-sustaining) • Registration agencies (cf ISBN) • Each can develop own sector rules, business model, services, fees, metadata etc – – DOI at cost DOI free DOI with other services etc

DOI syntax can include any existing identifier, formal or informal, of any entity DOI policies allow any business model for practical implementations extensible <indecs> framework: DOI can describe any form of intellectual property, at any level of granularity Handle resolution allows a DOI to link to any & multiple pieces of current data

Persistent identifier doi> • Resolution provides persistence • Easily seen in web applications - DOI never changes, but URL does: Handle resolution allows a DOI to link to any & multiple pieces of current data

doi> URL Content URL URL URL Printed identifiers, bookmarks, etc

doi> URL URL URL 404 File not found URL URL Content URL URL "Linkrot": recent estimates 16% in 6 months

doi> URL DOI Assigner DOI URL DOI Content DOI URL DOI directory DOI URL DOI Content DOI URL URLDOI URL

doi> DOI Assigner Internet DOI DOI DOI directory DOI DOI directory Content DOI DOI

doi> DOI Assigner DOI Response Page DOI DOI directory DOI DOI DOI • purchase content • view free excerpt • get related items • get add’l metadata • request permissions Content DOI More than just "locate" DOI DOI

doi> DOI Assigner DOI Response Page DOI DOI directory DOI DOI • purchase content • view free excerpt • get related items • get add’l metadata • request permissions DOI DOI DOI Bookstore

Metadata efficiency • • • <indecs> framework: in DOI can describe any form of intellectual property, at any level of granularity doi> Text objects (ONIX) Art objects (CIDOC) Learning objects (SCORM) Audio objects (GRID) Video objects (SMPTE) etc

Metadata efficiency • • • <indecs> framework: DOI can describe any form of intellectual property, at any level of granularity doi> Text objects (ONIX) Art objects (CIDOC) Learning objects (SCORM) Audio objects (GRID) Video objects (SMPTE) etc Common single mapping

Adding value: services doi> • Acrobat plug-in as focus example here (web based) • Four example demonstrations shown here: – Version (provide a dynamic update version of the pdf in hand) – Multiple resolution (retrieve multiple data: a URL and some metadata in this case) – Cross. Ref (retrieve a standard set of metadata and use it in an application, a citation builder) – Rights (very simple e-commerce interface as an illustration)

Adobe plug-in concept: what doi> Buttons "pop up" dynamically as services become available Tool Bar PDF Forward Linking Service AN Other Service DOI is not visible - within pdf package (like File/Properties in Word, etc) doi: 10. 123/456 Plug-In Acrobat Reader [ cache ] PDF document viewed through Acrobat reader

Demo 1 – Version Tool Bar

Demo 1 – Version Handle Record Tool Bar DOI TYPE cnri. test. jsn/pdf url last_modified DATA http: //host-4 -211/book-newversion. pdf 2002 -06 -13 T 14: 06: 03 -03: 00 Handle System Internet

Demo 1 – Version Tool Bar

Demo 1 – Version Click below to see animated demo

Demo 2 – Multi. Res

Demo 2 – Multi. Res doi> Related links

Demo 2 – Multi. Res

Demo 2 – Multi. Res Click below to see animated demo.

Demo 3 – Cross. Ref Tool Bar

Demo 3 – Cross. Ref Click below to see animated demo.

Demo 4 – Rights Tool Bar

Demo 4 – Rights button! Tool Bar XMP

Demo 4 – Rights Tool Bar

Demo 4 – Rights Click below to see animated demo

What we have done doi> Put the DOI data in functional units in the DOI record; and the knowledge of what to do with them in the client – Demonstrated with an end-user client (Acrobat) but equally applicable to middleware – No constraints on adding additional functional units to a given DOI – A common approach – could use same Handle record to manage pdf, html, mobile, etc. , hence efficient in deploying content across platforms

How can we use it? doi> • Assign DOIs to any content; or use assigned DOIs • Potentially: identification of other entities as well as content - e. g. "parties" (such as Companies: "Interparty" project and related "indecs" work; use existing numbers? ) • As a key for an e-commerce mechanism e. g. copy protection, tamper-proofing, signatures, micropayments: NOT a part of DOI, but enabled by it (added value services, tools) • How you use it is defined by you - it’s a tool

Who is using it now? doi> • Several hundred organisations • Several million DOIs • Example: Cross. Ref (www. crossref. org) • The top 160 publishers of technical articles. • around 3 million DOIs per year since Jan 2001 • Use DOI to maintain links between them ("citations"); allows each to use their own # system • Local copies; versions; links to supplementary material

Registration Agencies (Oct 2002) • • • doi> Cross. Ref Learning Objects Inc (USA, Do. D) Enpia (Korea: government endorsed) CDI (Consultancy, E Books, CORBIS, etc) CAL (Australian RRO) TSO (The Stationery Office) Others being discussed e. g. • Multilingual European DOI Registration Agency • Content ID Forum (Japan) • Music Industry project

DOI Registration Agencies 2000 -2002 Learning Objects Network doi> The Stationery Office For-profit Start-up Distance Education Software Firm Vermont, 2001 For-profit Existing Publisher spun out of HMSO London, 2002 Cross. Ref Non-Profit Start-up Consortium of Existing Large Publishers Boston, 2000 Content Directions For-profit Start-up DOI Consulting Firm New York, 2001 Enpia Systems For-profit Existing Software Firm Korea, 2001 Default RA IDF/CNRI Reston, 1997 Multilingual European DOI Registration Agency (MEDRA) Non-profit Consortium of Existing European Government Publisher Organizations Not Yet Appointed Copyright Agency, Ltd. For-profit Existing Rights Clearinghouse Australia, 2002

Who is behind it? doi> • International DOI Foundation (IDF) • Open member organisation, launched 1998 • Members; publishing, technology, intermediaries • Modelled on W 3 C, and on the Bar code development • www. doi. org

More information? • • www. doi. org DOI-News brief monthly mailing list DOI Reports to members (extensive) DOI Handbook; FAQ Main source of information doi>

Digital Object Identifier Norman Paskin, International DOI Foundation doi>

Appendix • • • Supplementary material DOI Application profiles concept Supporting IDF: benefits IDF development path DOI and internet standards

DOI Application Profiles h app. profile doi> Each Profile can be thought of as built from the kernel + extensions: DOI AP Compulsory kernel for any DOI metadata for application

Metadata elements h app. profile DOI Term ONIX doi> AP 10 Application may be defined in terms of another scheme, e. g. ONIX

doi> DOI Term ONIX AP 10 = Application defined in terms of another scheme, e. g. ONIX

doi> AP 10 Must have mapping for each element e. g. ONIX “Page” = iid 734 (DOI Term Set)

doi> DOI Term Set ONIX AP 10

doi> DOI users can see metadata as all defined in DOI terms: AP 10

doi> The advantage is in additional schemes/mappings: AP 27 AP 10

doi> AP 27 AP 10

Benefits of supporting DOIs • Persistent identification doi> – – Not just a location Permanent, trackable, name Stays the same if ownership, location, control changes No need to update customers if location changes – – – Standard e. g. ISBN, ISSN, ISMN, SICI, ISRC Non-standard / public e. g. PII Private e. g. workflow, internal production Assigned by the publisher or on his behalf • Can incorporate existing identifiers • Can interoperate metadata standards – Application profiles, kernel metadata, indecs. DD

Using DOIs doi> • Automated link from DOI to any (and multiple) points – Controlled by the assigner – e. g. Multiple locations; purchase options; additional info; access control can be made available and controlled globally by the publisher. Can be invoked globally by an intermediary, etc. • Build your own custom features: entirely extensible architecture • Generic applicability; any form of intellectual property, any granularity (text, music, audio. . ) – Simple standard metadata associated with each DOI to ensure interoperability • Conforms to, and works with, existing standards

Business benefits doi> • Promotes ready use of material in a legal, controllable, manner • Proven, implemented, real system in use now – e. g. Cross. Ref: 160+ publishers, around 3 million DOIs per year since Jan 2001, around 2 million resolutions per month, supports existing businesses • Demonstrated unique additional features – multiple resolution; DOI-APs – use of these limited only by your imagination • Low risk – – not a proprietary system; available at low cost controlled by neutral, not-for-profit Foundation with single aim. built on open standards. comprehensive effort reduces risk of "dead-end": Asia as well as EU, US; multimedia e. g. text, music, software

Leverage other activities IDF participates in other efforts • W 3 C, IETF DRM activities • PRISM, ONIX, indecs 2…. . • ISO TC 46, ISO MPEG • NISO, WIPO, etc • Music industry: GRID, CR Forum • Content ID Forum (Japan) • Indecs • TV Anytime etc No one company can participate in all these doi>

Why is support needed? doi> • if this is desirable, it must be paid for • membership supports development until operating federation takes over • community invests now to get benefit for all • coordinated work to provide efficient operation • ensure consistent deployment and avoid fragmentation • prevent conflicts and promote efficiency • outreach to other efforts

Benefits of supporting IDF doi> • Ensure the DOI is widely implemented – Existing applications need underpinning of consistent rules, infrastructure, and wide uptake • Ensure Content community sets standards – Technology standards are not enough (Napster) – No other existing forum is doing this: W 3 C, OEBF, MPEG 21 etc. all looking at parts • DOI results from extensive work by AAP, IPA, STM (1997+) - a consistent development path • IDF has strong position, and support. – Content and technology communities are represented • Promote collaboration – interoperate with others; reduce costs, prevent mistakes – provide a common platform but retain ability to build addedvalue services.

Benefits of supporting IDF doi> • Cost effective way of gaining access to expertise – Cost is equivalent to 2 -3 man days per month of one consultant (even at highest membership level) – Detailed Monthly briefings on other activities (WIPO, W 3 c, IETF, MPEG, ISO, OEBF, SIIA, etc), and more expertise available on request • Preferential access to business opportunities: – IDF makes connections between members and potential applications: explore at low risk possible business opportunities – Early access to results of prototypes, plans • Share cost of development of prototypes – Costs can be shared by participants • Influence the course of the IDF – participate in working groups, annual meeting, prototypes, board

Registration Agencies doi> • An additional business opportunity for some members • Build on the features and acceptance of the system – build on existing services or offer new services – management of content, management of metadata, etc. • RAs may build as little or as much as they wish on this – simple assignment, through to a wide range of services • RAs determine their own fate: – IDF provides federal structure for infrastructure, predictable costs and governance model – open market structure for applications • Business opportunity is a shared risk: – DOI service supported by multiple RAs and multiple applications – Shared costs of the infrastructure – common infrastructure encourages common added-value tools

DOI: development path doi> (persistent identifier) Multiple resolution W 3 C, WIPO, NISO, UDDI etc. Initial implementation Full implementation Activity tracking Single redirection Metadata A continuing development activity

DOI: components • 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)

Our aim: Building infrastructure doi> “Imagine a country where nobody can identify who owns what, addresses cannot easily be verified, people cannot be made to pay their debts, resources cannot conveniently be turned into money, ownership cannot be divided into shares, descriptions of assets are not standardized and cannot easily be compared, and the rules that govern property vary from neighbourhood to neighbourhood or even street to street. You have just put yourself into the life of a developing country or former communist nation” “The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Succeeds in the West and Fails Everywhere Else” by Hernando de Soto (2000)

Our aim: Building infrastructure 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. ” “The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Succeeds in the West and Fails Everywhere Else” by Hernando de Soto (2000) DOI: provide the tools for representations of intellectual property

Internet standards: DOI, URN and URL doi> • Distinguish two issues: 1. The technical specification of “what is” a URN and a URI 2. What this means for practical implementation

1. Internet specs doi> • See DOI handbook chapter 4 – 4. 9 DOI as a URI – 4. 10 DOI as a URN – equally true of all HDLs – DOIs are HDLs • Aim: DOIs are persistent across time and unique across network space • DOIs are URIs (formally draft specification) • DOIs are URNs (in effect) • URN and URI proponents disagree – “the URN wars”

1. Internet specs doi> http: // www. w 3. org/addressing (But largely from IETF, W 3 C did not see need for URN) URI URN URL ftp: gopher: http: urn: Resolution (N 2 L)

DOI as URI doi> • IETF formal spec “URI scheme for Digital Object identifier” – Paskin, Norman; Neylon, Eamonn; Hammond, Tony; Sun, Sam; Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) scheme for Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs); http: //www. ietf. org/internet-drafts/draft-paskin-doi-uri-00. txt (February 2002)An abstract specification (uri: doi: ) – Would be doi: (like tel: ) [uri: is not part of the uri spec, unlike urn: ] • May be a pure name or de-referenced by any service – The namespace provides its own mechanism (“Bootstrapping”) • RFC 2396: UTF-8 encoding allows non-Roman characters • On its own, it’s just a specification! • Requires code distribution for any implementation

DOI as URN • URN is less clear: doi> – Higher level situation muddy – Set of IETF drafts that define URN – Set of registered namespaces (e. g. isbn) • DOI could be but isn’t- no advantage • Unlike URI, provides a specific DNS-based middle layer (RDS) to find the appropriate resolution service • Scalability and security questioned; and: • Little or no resolution implementation – Resolution proposed is one specific way: – NAPTR(Name Authority Pointer) turns urn: hdl: 10. 1000/1 into http: //hdl. handle. net/10. 1000 – Recently DDDS(Dynamic Delegation Discovery System): variant of NAPTR

DOI as URN doi> • urn: isbn: 123456789 can be defined ; but what does it do over and above isbn: 123456789? – neither have a readily available, well known, global, resolution • What if NAPTR were widely deployed? (5 years on)? • Some advantage: could redirect from one URL proxy to another – urn: doi to http: //dx. doi. org/ redirect to http: //dx 2. doi. org • But this is a “regular expression”: not software • And still worries about DNS issues – “Gratuitous use of DNS” – DNS name servers are widely distributed – inertia – No security of resolution

1. Internet specs doi> • Persistence across time and network space desirable • Do not want to bet on the URN logic of putting a resolution system in front of resolution systems – Especially the one proposed • But – DOIs ARE URIs (formally) – DOIs ARE URNs (in effect) • But: this is not the most important issue!

2. Practical implementation doi> • Irrespective of all this URI/URN specification, DOIs are still needed, still useful, still valid • A DOI is more than HDL – Adds Policy, business rules, business model – Adds Metadata specifications (cf ISBN, EAN, Visa) • e. g. Mappings: – – – Ensures semantic integrity A technical exercise: A term is assigned a unique value in the i. DD Given a genealogy and Context. Description Other information added A mapped term becomes part of the dictionary • Hence will become more useful as it grows – Consensual between the two things being mapped – Painstaking, but once-only – Specialist services requiring intellectual input

2. Practical implementation doi> • On this topic, see • DOI Handbook Ch. 3. 6: Social infrastructure • DOI Handbook Ch. 6: on The Handle System and using HDL without DOIs • DOI Handbook Ch. 13: on RAs and using DOIs without RAs