IDF Members meeting 2005 doi>. Mario Renaldi: President, MEDRA doi> IDF Members meeting 2005.

IDF Members meeting 2005

doi>

Mario Renaldi: President, MEDRA

doi>


Jonathan Clark: Chairman, IDF

doi>


Norman Paskin

doi>

Director’s Review of the past year

• We have 55 people, from 33 organisations

• Our thanks to MEDRA for hosting

• About half of us are invited participants from other sectors – 26 from 18 non-member organisations– Some are first-time participants– We avoid “internal” matters as far as possible and focus on

applications and updates on progress

doi>IDF meeting 2005

• 2004 meeting: began evolving into less of a “members meeting” and more a general DOI seminar. Technical workshop.

• 2005: no additional workshops – Members-only strategy meeting (Monday)– Board meeting Wednesday

• Presentations will be available on the DOI web site • Feedback from last meeting:

– keep the open invitation to others, and be open– Allow more time for networking

• Board members in particular want to hear from you

doi>IDF meeting 2005

• Jonathan Clark (Chairman) Elsevier • Ed Pentz (Vice Chair) CrossRef• Craig Van Dyck (Treasurer), John Wiley & Sons• Jens Bammel, International Publishers Association• Pat Schroeder, Association of American Publishers• Gertraud Griepke, Springer - SBM• Bruce Funkhouser, Copyright Clearance Center• Johan Steenbakkers, CENL• Scott MacFarland, Ovid Technologies• Bob Bolick, McGraw-Hill• Michael Fraser, Copyright Agency Ltd.• John Purcell, LON, Inc.• Terry Blake, TSO

IDF Board Members doi>

The agenda has been slightly modified Session One • Director’s summary

Session Two: RA Updates• Selected Updates from existing applications (RAs):

– TIB, OPOCE, ELEONET – Coffee break

• Customer Focus: OECD’s Statlinks• Panel session on New DOI Applications

– Lunch and networking

Session Three: Future Perspectives:• Possible use of DOI in electronic licensing

– Break

Session Four: Maintaining DOI’s added value• Standards updates• Intellectual property issues

• Close and evening guided walking tour followed by buffet reception

Outline of the day doi>

Two consistent themes since 1998 doi>

ActivitytrackingActivitytracking

Full implementation

Full implementation

Initial implementation

Initial implementation

Single redirection (persistent identifier)

Metadata Other efforts, standards, etc

Multiple resolution

A continuing development activity

(1) DOI: development in three tracks

(2) Creation of an organisation

IDF

M &

cost-reduction development spend

Operating Federation

RA

C

1. Strategy review – is growth sufficient?- Only one new area (data)- Modest growth in DOIs of most RAs- Underlying income = costs – vulnerable to

problems

- Restructuring: proposal from RAs 2. Finalising DOI system: IP issues

- Completing main development work - Good progress with standards bodies

- IP issues need to be dealt with

Main themes 2005 doi>

Selected highlights (see DOI News) doi>• June 2004: IDF formally awarded MPEG RDD*• CrossRef launched CrossRef Search

(DOI/Google)• Open URL using DOI by Infotrieve• CENDI persistent identifiers paper endorsing

. Handle and DOI• Aug 2004: OPOCE as RA: EC publications to get DOIs• IPA resolution endorses DOI for publishers• TSO launches free+ pricing model • CDI announces McGraw-Hill and other uses• Oct 2004: IDF reaffirms DOI as open spec • National Libraries (CENL) join IDF Board• EPS White papers on DOI business case• Nature using DOI with RSS

Selected highlights (see DOI News) doi>• Nov 2004: DOI accepted as ISO work item*• OECD launches StatLinks for tables*• DLF: ERMI e-licensing workshop • DOIs for science data: CODATA • Mar 2005: ISO confirms MPEG RDD* • Apr 2005: Member survey on Strategy • RAWG/Board Strategy meeting• TIB becomes DOI agency for science data • Names4Life joins IDF • Revision of DOI syntax standard*• ONIX for licensing terms project launched• Jun 2005: IDF participant in Internet Governance Forum • Handle System Public Licence for GRID*• Bowker Marketlinks announced

2005 meeting:1. Strategy review – is growth sufficient?

- Only one new area (data)- Modest growth in DOIs of most RAs- Underlying income = costs – vulnerable to

problems

- Restructuring proposal from RAs 2. Finalising DOI system & IP issues



Main themes doi>

Cumulative DOI Deposits – by RA per year

Currently 10 RAs: but one dominates doi>

0

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2500000

3000000

3500000

4000000

4500000

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Period

No. of DOI Deposits per year

TIB

Nielsen

Bowker

mEDRA

TSO

LON

CAL

Enpia

CDI

CrossRef

(6 months)

Cumulative DOI Prefixes – by RA per year doi>

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Period

Cumulative No. Of DOI prefixes

TIB

Nielsen

Bowker

mEDRA

TSO

CAL

LON

Enpia

CDI

CrossRef

But prefix development improving

• No increases in fees for either members or RA fees in 2005• Net gain of one RA member: TIB converted from a General member in 2005

– June 2004 IEEE did not renew (CrossRef members)– June 2004 Enpia (RA) did not renew (but have recently re-approached)– July 2004 Microsoft did not renew (sponsor left)– August 2004 OPOCE joined as RA member– January 2005 Knowledge Solutions did not renew (special case)2005– March 2005 McGraw-Hill changed from Charter to General member – May 2005 NamesforLife joined as a General member– May 2005 TIB converted from a General to RA member

doi>Membership

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

No. of Members

5000 11500 20000 23500 35000 40000

Membership Fees

Spread of Membership

Number of Members: 31 (5 Charter, 14 General, 10 RA and 2 Affiliate)(better than we forecast in budget)

$40K$5K

Number

The planned conversion from membership support to operational support is happening:

Year Number of RAs (end year) %of revenues RAs 1999 0 02000 1 <102001 3 202002 6 372003 7 502004 9 622005 Forecast 10 712006 Forecast 11 76

Increase in RA funding doi>

Non

-RA members

0

54

RA Large6 0

RA Small

0

23

Break-even on current costs:Six Crossrefs or equivalent

or 20 small RAs

orA mix in between

Breakeven is a point

where lines intersect

• The planned conversion from membership support to operational support is happening

• But the pie is not getting big enough • Leaves us very vulnerable to the unexpected

– e.g. 2005: projected initial small gain will be a small loss– Due to unanticipated legal costs

• Concern if: – increased membership attrition, one or more RAs leave– Lower than forecast growth rates – No take up in new sectors

• Solutions:– Cut expenses– Increase operational income– Other income (loans, grants, equity etc)

• Questionnaire survey of members on strategy

IDF Strategy for growth doi>

• Move to Managing Agent rather than central IDF staff • More cautious forecasts of growth to 2009

– Fewer non-RA members (12 to 11, compared to 13 throughout)– No new RAs (10 throughout, compared to growth to 11,13,14)– Advance payment of some fees by RAs and Charters

• Save costs in long term• Focus on enabling current RAs to generate more DOIs • Limited outreach to new sectors

– avoid more RAs in same sectors• Consolidation • Under review • Strategic implications being discussed

– Including: how to get more DOIs?

Led to: Restructuring proposal from RAWG doi>

How to get more DOIs

• Promoting basic concepts is a role of IDF• Simplified Handbook • DOI Factsheets (on web site)

• SEE LATEST “Value Added by DOI” • Simplified presentations (on web site)

• Staff focus on infrastructure, applications in new areas• e.g. Persistent Identifiers • e.g. ERMI, DRM, CODATA, etc

• RAs focus on building applications in their existing sectors

• IDF has developed some tools for RAs: in areas of • Resolution – e.g. Acrobat plug-in • Multiple resolution: DOI-AP framework• Semantic interoperability: Data Dictionary• Why is uptake of these slow?

doi>

Tool Bar

Acrobat plug-in: “Get latest version”

DOI

Last date

Tool Bar

cnri.test.jsn/pdf

TYPE DATA

http://host-4-211/book-newversion.pdfurl

last_modified 2002-06-13T14:06:03-03:00

DOI

Handle Record

2002-06-13T14:06:03-03:00

http://host-4-211/book-newversion.pdf

Internet

Handle System


Tool Bar


Acrobat plug-in: Multiple Resolution /Metadata

Related linksdoi>




Entity

784369

965876

456

908

453

Service Instance Service Definition

Service Definition

Entity

Entity

Entity

Entity

Entity

EntityService Instance

Application Profile

Application Profile

453784

Service Instance

Application Profile

Service Instance

Service Definition

The properties of groups of DOIs are defined as APs

APs have one or moreServices

Services havedefinitions

DOI Data Model: AP Framework

New APs and services may be created or made available

Entities are identified by DOIs

DataDictionary

Metadata scheme e.g. ONIX

Metadata scheme e.g. SCORM

ONIX:Author = NormanRights:Writer

Metadata SchemeNormanRights

Term “Author”

Term “Writer”

Data Dictionary

How to get more DOIs

• Need to marry these concepts to practical applications

• Discussion item for the later panel on DOI New Applications

doi>

2005 meeting:1. Strategy review – is growth sufficient?

- Only one new area (data)- Modest growth in DOIs of most RAs- Underlying income = costs – vulnerable to

problems




Main themes doi>

• Completing main development work – Multiple resolution and metadata frameworks essentially

complete? – Stabilise “Core specification”

• Good progress with standards bodies– Core specification standards-based – See presentations this afternoon

• NISO - syntax revision finalised*• ISO – DOI system accepted as work item*• ISO MPEG – IDF role in data dictionary approved*• URI – remains under discussion*

Finalising DOI system & IP issues doi>

• “Once the Internet went commercial, intellectual property (IP) issues assumed a legal and cultural importance like never before…”

– Information Today, p.1, June 2005

Intellectual Property issues doi>

• IP issues need to be dealt with

- IDF has been discussing IP matters since the outset- Board decision that patent etc was inappropriate at

that stage of development - Community and trust felt to be important - Proceeding on the basis of a developing membership

agreement and RA Letter of Intent with implicit and some explicit IP policy or intention expectations.

- Aug 2004: Became aware of several patent application with mention of DOI by CDI

- Accelerated this IDF IP process into an explicit formal policy proposal.

- NOTE the aim is to arrive at a generic policy – not solely deal with the CDI issue (which will not be discussed here now)

Finalising DOI system & IP issues doi>

- To affirm DOI as an open specification - as per DOI News October 2004

• Clarity about IP ownership in all elements of the DOI specifications

• Clarity about any third party owned IP which form an essential element of implementation of the DOI specifications (e.g. CNRI, CONTECS)

• Clarity about any third party IP not an essential part of the specifications: allow others to build IP on top with assurance

• Compliance with DOI standard in IP terms through (RA) licences

Ed Pentz will discuss the IDF’s proposal later this afternoon.

Aim of drawing up an IP policy doi>

A concern of many SSOs – see almost any issue of Information Today etc!

Lemley: “Intellectual Property Rights and Standard Setting Organisations” 2002:

- A quarter of 30 SSOs examined by Lemley had no policy - Diversity in IP policies of different SSOs - did not reflect any drivers but

largely accidental.

IP policy discussions with organisations IDF is aware of or has consulted, including ISO, NISO, OeBF, W3C, IETF, CRF, Mi3P, and OASIS.

• The greatest concern of almost all SSOs in their IP policy relates to the inclusion of patented technology in a specification, and the implications that may arise for users.

• Typically provisions relate to disclosure of patents (and sometimes to pending patent applications) and their licensing.

• Policies are designed to avoid members keeping deliberately silent about existing or planned relevant IP claims. There is considerable concern over “submarine” patents.

• The issue of patent disclosure is often linked with the standardisation process itself, which may require detailed disclosure and licensing agreement timetables.

• Most SSOs are not licensing bodies but make their specifications widely available without charge

• SSOs may also seek in a policy to limit their liability to any adopter of the specification.

IP and “Standards Setting Organizations” doi>

1. Strategy review – is growth sufficient?- Only one new area (data)- Modest growth in DOIs of most RAs- Underlying income = costs – vulnerable to

problems




Summary doi>

Norman Paskin

doi>

Director’s Review of the past year

October 2004 IDF re-affirms DOI as an open specification

• The International DOI Foundation has re-affirmed its primary purpose of promoting the widest possible distribution and use of DOIs and the DOI System and ensuring that the DOI remains an open standard and system available to all who wish to adopt it. The IDF committed at its latest Board meeting to adopting a policy on Intellectual Property rights associated with the DOI system, in order to provide clarity and assurance to users of the DOI System.

• The key feature of the IDF Policy is that the IDF, as governance body of the DOI system, safeguards (owns or licences on behalf of registrants) all Intellectual Property Rights relating to the DOI System. It works with RAs and with the underlying technical standards of the DOI components to ensure that any improvements made to the DOI system (including creation, maintenance, registration, resolution and policymaking of DOIs) are available to any DOI registrant. DOI resolution is of course already freely available to any user encountering a DOI.

• The IDF and its members put considerable effort and resources into continuing development of the DOI System, and so the International DOI Foundation recognizes that (as with standards bodies in other spheres) it must take adequate measures to preserve, protect and enhance its operating processes to encourage its Members to improve and expand the DOI System and to enjoy the benefits of those efforts, while at the same time encouraging the continuing development and use of DOI-based technologies among DOI registrants in pursuing such infrastructure development.

IDF Members meeting 2005 doi>. Mario Renaldi: President, MEDRA doi> IDF Members meeting 2005.

Documents

doi news doi

year doi

doi agency

day doi slide

idf doi idf members

progress doi idf meeting

main themes doi slide

medra doi idf members