ITU Focus Group on Identity Management Geneva, February 2007 Norman Paskin Content industry standards activities T E R T I U S L t d

Norman Paskin –Member of ISO TC/46/SC9 Identifier Interoperability working group –Digital Object Identifier system –Chair of CONTECS (indecs2 consortium) –Member ACAP Technical Working group, etc Outline of the presentation: Relevance for ITU FG Terminology traps Overview of major activities: –ISO content identifiers –DOI (Digital Object Identifier) –music; publishing; licensing –MPEG –Party identifiers –Web-based identifiers Common themes and lessons Content industry standards activities

ITU FG scope: management of...attributes of an entity Accommodate existing and new identity schemes There is relevant ongoing work in other standards fora A consistent approach to all kinds of inter-related entities is now recognised as necessary: Content industry standards activities People make Stuff use Deals about do Parties: living or deceased, people or organisations; groups; pseudonyms; avatars; characters; etc Usual focus of identity management

ITU FG scope: management of...attributes of an entity Accommodate existing and new identity schemes There is relevant ongoing work in other standards fora A consistent approach to all kinds of inter-related entities is now recognised as necessary: … which entities digital identities need to be tied to, from users via networks, services, applications, content etc. to things in general The need to support roles and partial identities targeted to specific roles or usage contexts. the requirement to support both roles that represent real persons as well as the construction of virtual persons.. –ITU Workshop on Digital Identity for Next Generation Networks, Dec 06 Relevance to ITU FG IdM

Identifier = numbering schemes Registries Normally central control, commitment Examples: ISBN, EAN bar codes, IANA, ITU phone numbering plans etc Normally focus on attributes (metadata) Identifier = syntax specifications Normally little central control e.g URI (URL); MPEG-21 DII Few structured attributes, low barriers to entry Some more structured than others: e.g. URN, info URI Other confusions: Some practical systems use both schemes and specifications (e.g. DOI) Interactions between schemes and specifications: –e.g. an ISBN can be expressed as a URL, as an EAN bar code, a DOI, etc Identifier as system versus as a unique label There are many badly-designed numbering schemes There are many incorrect uses of well-designed numbering schemes Terminology: the over-used term identifier

ISO content identification numbering ISO 2108 International Standard Book Numbering (ISBN) ISO 3297 International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) ISO 3901 International Standard Recording Code (ISRC) ISO International Standard Music Number (ISMN) ISO International Standard Audiovisual Number (ISAN) ISO Version identifier for Audiovisual Works (V-ISAN) ISO International Standard Musical Work Code (ISWC) ISO International Standard Text Code (ISTC) Information and Documentation - Identification and Description Defining metadata now a requirement for each identifier scheme: entities must be described as well as named

International Standard Party Identifier (ISPI) –ISO Project –a new international identification system for the parties (persons and corporate bodies) involved in the creation and production of content entities. –Work on the ISPI project began in August 2006 Digital Object Identifier (DOI) System –ISO/WD –To standardise the existing DOI system (syntax is already a national US standard, NISO Z39.84) Identifier Interoperability working group –Informal group –To consider what steps are necessary to improve interoperability of existing and future ISO TC46/SC9 identifiers –Identifier Interoperability: a report… Some relevant current ISO TC46/SC9 activities

The DOI System DOI (Digital Object Identifier) system: Initially developed from the publishing industry but now wider a non-profit collaboration to develop infrastructure for persistent identification and management of content Approx 2000 user organisations (through agencies) Currently being standardised in ISO (TC46/SC9) the home of ISBN etc content identifiers One application of the Handle System adds to it additional features – social and technical infrastructure, policies, metadata management. focus on one area of interest (content/intellectual property) offers a specific data model based on indecs (discussed later) DOI technology equally applicable for parties and licences

CISAC = Int. Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers Co-ordinates a music industry information system (member-based) IPI = Interested Party Identifier (which John Williams?) Long established system Recent MWLI: Musical Works Licence Identifier* DDEX = Digital Data Exchange* Messaging standards for music industry chain Modelled on earlier publishing industry efforts (ONIX) etc Has its own Party ID ( ) GrId = Global Release Identifier for digital tracks etc*. * Spun out from Music Industry Integrated Identifiers Project (Mi3p) Music supply chain

ONIX = Online information exchange Editeur: International umbrella body for book industry standards development Collaborative effort with international, national and sectoral organisations Develops and maintains ONIX, EDItEUR / EDIFACT & XML / EDI standards etc Messaging exchange between publishers, booksellers (Amazon etc), libraries Works closely with ISBN International and others Expanding into related areas Publishing supply chain

ONIX is developing standards for licensing and for multimedia, both of which require a rich semantic interoperability, –ONIX for Licensing Terms: need for license terms to be expressed in standard processable format –DLF Electronic Resource Management Initiative (ERMI) working with NISO and EDItEUR to enable standardised statement of usage rights linked with digital resources RDA (Resource Description and Access – new AACR); sharedRDA/ONIX Framework for resource categorisation – –Cataloging, Digital Archiving and Preservation projects have similar requirements Some relevant ONIX developments

The ACAP project Automated Content Access Protocol Recently launched Technical framework which will allow publishers to provide permissions information (relating to access and use of their content) in a form in which it can be recognised and where necessary interpreted by a search engine crawler, Aim: search engine operator (and perhaps, ultimately, any other user) is enabled systematically to comply with a policy or licence. Being developed as an industry standard by the publishing industry, working with search engines and other technical and commercial partners. the availability or otherwise of standard methods of identification of content, licenses, systems and business partners are key issues for ACAP. Identification is crucial for authentication of systems and partners as well as for location of content and licenses.

User AUser B Transaction/Use/Relationship Digital Item Authorization/Value Exchange Transaction of some digital item Information about that transaction Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) working group of ISO/IEC Builds on MPEG standards MPEG 1, 2,4,7.. MPEG 21: The Multimedia Framework MPEG 21 (ISO/IEC 21000)

Part 3: Digital Item Identifier – syntax placeholder for e.g. URL, DOI, GrID Part 5: Rights Expression Language –can identify Principals Part 6: Rights Data Dictionary –2000-term data dictionary for semantic interoperability –Contextual event-based, managed, data model – –Methodology for continuing extensibility; more later Part 15: Event Reporting –enable owners of content to receive information about what has happened to their stuff MPEG 21 (ISO/IEC 21000) 18 standards under various categories: Digital Item Identification Intellectual Property Management and Protection Terminals and Networks Digital Item Management and Usage Digital Item Representation Event Reporting

Some industry-specific standards –e.g. CIS IPI system (availability/governance issues) –Current STM publishers work on author and institute disambiguation Impractical to identify everybody End-user identification mainly an issue of authentication –ATHENS, SHIBBOLETH Identification of individual and corporate persons a major issue for rights (and authority control in libraries) Parties are more than just persons –Organisations, personae, pseudonyms, avatars… identified need for a directory of parties linking person identifier schemes Identifying parties

An EU-funded project ( ) looking at the interoperation of party identifiers – Aimed to demonstrate how (and why) existing schemes could interoperate e.g. –Library authority files –CISAC / IPI –Bibliographic databases –Performer databases Identified mechanisms for issues such as partial matching Built on an earlier project: ISPI (ISO TC46/SC9) should learn from this Interparty

Web-related identifiers URI, URL and URN Internet community has been through some debate and confusion regarding URI and URN specifications. Confusions seem to centre on: Conflation of indication of the location of the end point, and an indication of identity Differing views of whether DNS should be optional or required for resolution Contemporary point of view of the URI working group aims at reconciliation Still some different views compared to ontology work semantic web work may throw light on this Related work specific to information industries through NISO:

NISO NISO = National Information Standards Organization Open URL NISO standard Z A syntax to create web-transportable packages of metadata and/or identifiers about an information object. Not an identifier, but a complementary technology for appropraite redirection of an identifier resolution e.g. in use with Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) "info" URI Registry IETF RFC 4452: The "info" URI Scheme for Information Assets with Identifiers in Public Namespaces. Turn legacy identifiers into URLs (e.g. info:lccn/ ) Now formalizing policies for the "info" URI registry. This identifier and its registry could serve as a focal point for NISO's identifier activity, creating a trusted brand and a starting point for community members doing work that requires identifiers. (NISO workshop on identifiers 2006)

These are not unrelated independent efforts. (1)Many of these standards and projects share a common view (and fundamental data model) of identifiers and metadata - the view which has a strong lineage over almost ten years: Common themes and unifying activities

Interoperability of Data in E-Commerce Systems project (= MPEG21 Rights Data Dictionary) Focus on multimedia rights metadata: recognized that rights and descriptive metadata were inseparable. Produced an event-based reference model/framework (parties, resources, agreements) 50% EC funding + consortium members including: EDItEUR (international book industry standards/ONIX) IFPI (international record industry) MPAA (international film industry) Various copyright societies and associations Various technology providers Library and author representatives International DOI Foundation Metadata in networks needs to support interoperability across –media (e.g. books, serials, audiovisual, software, abstract works). –functions (e.g. cataloguing, discovery, workflow, rights mgmt). –levels of metadata (from simple to complex). –semantic barriers. –linguistic barriers. The framework

Principles: Unique Identification: every entity should be uniquely identified within an identified namespace. Functional Granularity: it should be possible to identify an entity whenever it needs to be distinguished [1 st class] Designated Authority: the author of an item of metadata should be securely identified. Appropriate Access: everyone requires access to the metadata on which they depend, and privacy and confidentiality for their own metadata from those who are not dependent on it. Definition of metadata: An item of metadata is a relationship that someone claims to exist between two referents (description) Delivered: Generic data model of e-commerce all types of intellectual property Specifications for supporting services Standardisation proposals Documentation at Led to: Contextual ontology architecture: contexts, roles, identities The framework

Agent PlaceTime Resource Context EntityTypes An Entity may have typed relationships with Entities of any kind (including those of its own kind) EntityTypes An Entity may have typed relationships with Entities of any kind (including those of its own kind) AttributeTypes An Entity may have Attributes of any kind. (Attributes, which are a type of Resource, may have their own Attributes). AttributeTypes An Entity may have Attributes of any kind. (Attributes, which are a type of Resource, may have their own Attributes). Contextual Relationships Role Relator Descriptor Name Identifier Annotation Category Flag Quantity Attributes (illustrative: any Entity or Attribute may have Attributes of any type) Every Relationship has a Relator Verb Figure 1 COA MetaModelOverview Non Contextual Relationships (illustrative: any Type of Entity may relate to any other) Contextual ontology metamodel overview

Licensing Event UseEvent Permits (MAY) 1-n UseEvent Prohibits (MUST NOT) 0-n Payment Reporting Event etc Requires (MUST) 0-n Has Exception Has Precondition This structure allows for whatever level of flexibility or granularity may be required now or in the future. e.g. Terms of a Licence as a group of Events Event = time, place, entities

Contextual Ontology usage examples ISO MPEG-21 Rights Data Dictionary ( DDEX Digital Data EXchange - music industry ( ONIX: Book industry (+) messaging schemas ( ) ONIX: Rights: ONIX for Licensing Terms, Repertoire and Distribution Digital Library Federation - communication of licence terms (ERMI: working with ONIX for licensing terms) DOI Data Dictionary ( ) Rightscoms OntologyX - licensee of early output, plus their own later work ( ) RDA (Resource Description and Access); next generation of AACR/MARC cataloguing – RDA/ONIX common framework ACAP: Automated Content Access Protocol ( ) Consistent with FRBR, ABC-Harmony, OWL, CIDOC CRM, etc

OntologyX Rightscom: DDEX etc iDD IDF + ONIX Defining through interoperable metadata (2000) indecs Framework Ltd IFPI/RIAA, MPA, IDF, DentsuMMG, Rightscom 2 = CONTECS (2001+) ISO MPEG21 RDD IDF Development of indecs :

1.Many of these standards and projects share a common view (and fundamental data model) of identifiers and metadata 2.Some of these standards and projects share a common view (and fundamental data model) of identifier resolution Internet registries and distributed resolution First class naming, functional granularity Info URI, URN? The Handle System: ideal choice to provide resolution for all identifiers –10 years + –See separate presentation –DOI is a prime example –schemes that dont want to use DOI can use own handle implementation Existing numbering schemes may be a suffix of a Handle –DOI currently working with ISBN International (ISBNs as DOIs) Or metadata may be linked through data values in handle record First class naming, appropriate granularity Authentication, security, does not conflate identity and data (e.g. location), etc. Common themes and unifying activities

Conclusion Content industry standards activities are extending their old focus on numbering schemes –into party identification, licensing, data modelling, and fundamental principles –interoperability, internet registries, ontologies Management of identifiers and metadata = Naming and meaning of digital objects Need for first class naming –Handle system –infrastructure for extensible distributed services for using names to locate and disseminate objects Need for semantic interoperability –Contextual ontology ( ): Contexts, roles, relationships –functional granularity –use of existing metadata schemes Identity management discussions can learn from and use these techniques

ITU Focus Group on Identity Management Geneva, February 2007 Norman Paskin Content industry standards activities T E R T I U S L t d