1 APARSEN - WP2200 Identifiers and Citability Interoperability Framework for PI systems Webinar on PI - 15 February 2013 Maurizio Lunghi.

1

APARSEN - WP2200

Identifiers and Citability

Interoperability Framework for PI systems

Webinar on PI - 15 February 2013

Maurizio Lunghi

2

WP 22, IDENTIFIERS AND CITABILITY: OBJECTIVES AND TASK RELATIONS

Digital Preservation policy - I1. Explicit declaration of interest by a user comunity to

use some content in long term

Select what we want to preserve and why and for what use and under what conditions and for how long, assign responsibilities & roles, allocate resources.

2. Develop basic services needed for the preservation of the main info and its significant properties

Basic services needed for any type of user community are some trusted digital repositories collectively available to the users and a unique, standard, global and stable identification system for resources & actors.

Digital Preservation policy - II

1. Periodic regeneration and duplication of content

Digital content must be refreshed and duplicate in different sites, technology migration must be foreseen. Tools for rendering are needed.

2. Preserve its significant properties

Descriptive metadata and context info are needed, tools to check identification, authenticity, provenience and integrity.

3. Preserve other related info

Information is never ‘atomic’, objects have some relations with other objects and resource and with some actorsc who generated or modified the content.

5

Persistent Identifiers what’s that ??

Persistent Identifier is not only a number, it’s a service based on a contract between user community or content holders and service-providers responsible for the implementation and maintenance of the PI-service and the functionality of the system.

In addition to access for a resource we need to check other significant properties:

stable identification (PI) … multiple tooauthenticity + integrity

provenance + authorowner + rights

+relations with other resources & with actors

6

Persistent Identifiers systems

The PI technologies help make stable the reference to digital

resources, even if it is well-known that persistency is not only

a technical issue, no technology can exist indefinitely or

guarantee services without a trusted organization behind and

a clearly defined policy.

PI systems are meant as:

a) available technology

b) trusted organization

c) precise policies for digital preservation,

implemented by the managers of the related user community

7

A Trusted NBN-ITIETF URN based identifiers, NBN namespace IETF RFC 3188 responsibility cleared assigned to National Libraries

NBN:IT:BNCF-12345

NBN:IT is a service of the legal deposit and supports 3 types of persistence:1) Persistence of the identifier 2) Persistence of the association URNs and URLs 3) Persistence of the resource referenced by NBN (backup) The community is represented by all institutions that want to deposit contents to the National Library after the signing of an official agreement (contract)

8

GOAL: to set the foundations and identify the basic concepts within the universe of PI systems, for developing appropriate interoperability solutions and services.

MAIN ASSUMPTIONS:

1 In the IF we consider only entities identified by at least one PI

2 Only PI Domains (PIDs) that meet some criteria are eligible to be considered in the IF: trusted PI systems

3 We delegate the responsibility to define relations among resources and actors to the trusted PIDs

4 We don’t address digital preservation issues directly

INTEROPERABILITY FRAMEWORK (IF)

9

TRUSTED PI SYSTEM: CRITERIA

1. Having at least one Registration Agency.

2. Having one Resolver accessible on the Internet.

3. Uniqueness of the assigned PIs within the PI domain.

4. Guaranteeing the persistence of the assigned PIs.

5. User communities of the PID should implement policies for

digital preservation (e.g. trusted digital repositories)

6. Reliable resolution.

7. Uncoupling the PIs from the resolver.

8. Managing the relations between the PIs within the domain.

10

1. Validation of the IF model through the HLEG a user group with 30 experts on PI.

[May-October 2012]

2. Definition and set up of a demonstrator with data from different PI domains and for objects, people and bodies

[November-December 2012]

3. Refinement of the IF model and ontology, new proposal presented at the workshop in Florence on 13 Dec

Activity 2012

11

Handle

NBN

ARK

FRDDNBDANS

STMGLOBITCERN

OR

CID

VIAF

CERN

ISNI

DOI

INTEROPERABILITY FRAMEWORK

New services cross-domainsfor users requirements

Contents from all PI domains noware accessible in the same way

INTEROPERABILITY FRAMEWORK (IF)

12

1. Validation of the new IF model and ontology through the HLEG with new experts

[February-May 2013]

2. Expansion of the demonstrator on a distributed environment with content providers on LOD

[March-May 2013]

3. Proposal of few services and development on a cross PI Domains (PIDs) basis

[June-September 2013]

4. Check user satisfaction on services [October-December 2013]

Action Plan 2013

13

New services cross-domainsfor users requirements

Contents from all PI domains expose on LOD in the same way Ring of Trust

INTEROPERABILITY FRAMEWORK (IF)

IF on LOD

CERN

DANS

DNB

FRD