Digital preservation: identifiers and rights

Digital preservation: identifiers and rights
5 Dec 2002 Preparing for Digital Preservation What is being preserved: Identification and Rights Management issues Norman Paskin International DOI Foundation doi> (c) IDF 2002

doi> Recommended background material
Preservation Management of Digital Materials – The Handbook N. Beagrie/M. Jones/DPC 3.4 Rights management 4.4 Metadata and Documentation 4.5 Access Digital preservation: an introduction to the standards issues surrounding the deposit of non-print publications M Bide/E J Potter/A Watkinson Sept 1999

doi> Outline of presentation 1. Identifiers
1.1 Identifiers and metadata 1.2 Interoperability 1.3 Different meanings of “identifier” 1.4 Persistence “Keep a copy” - ? Rights 3.1 Accessing “definitive copy” 3.2 Rights framework

doi> 1.1 Identifiers and metadata
An identifier = an unambiguous string denoting an entity 0550

An item of metadata = “a relationship that someone claims to exist between two entities” (indecs), each of which may have an identifier: 0550 [BookData says] the cover of this book is red Pantone 4567

To be useful, an identifier requires some metadata: 0550 [Books in print says] The title of this identified book is…. Chambers Dictionary

entity: something that is identified “Nothing exists until is identified” Entities may include: Abstractions (red); technical means (MP3 player); labels (title); things (book) etc. ontology: structured relationships between entities “an explicit formal specification of how to represent the entities that are assumed to exist in some area of interest and the relationships that hold among them” (such as: “page” is component of “book”) Examples: indecs framework; ONIX; FRBR

5 Dec 2002 1.2 Interoperability doi> In a distributed environment, there is no one central physical archive A distributed virtual archive requires that all the players and components interoperate (c) IDF 2002

5 Dec 2002 1.2 Interoperability doi> Across media books, serials, audio, audiovisual, software, abstract works, visual material, etc Across functions cataloguing, discovery, workflow, rights management, archiving Across levels of metadata Simple, complex Across linguistic and semantic barriers Across territorial barriers Across technology platforms (c) IDF 2002

5 Dec 2002 1.2 Interoperability doi> Preservation: "How do we interoperate with the future?“ Preservation issues (identifiers, metadata, rights) are the same as any other interoperability problem (c) IDF 2002

doi> doi> 1.3 Meanings of “identifier”
[1] Labels: the output of “numbering schemes” ISBN: ISO 2108:1992 International Standard Book Numbering ISSN: ISO 3297:1998 International Standard Serial Number ISRC: ISO 3901:2001 International Standard Recording Code ISRN: ISO 10444:1997 International Standard Technical Report Number ISMN: ISO 10957:1993 International Standard Music Number ISWC: ISO 15707:2001 International Standard Musical Work Code ISAN: Draft ISO International Standard Audiovisual Number V-ISAN: Draft ISO Version Identifier for audiovisual works ISTC: Draft ISO International Standard Text Code PII: Publisher Item Identifier etc

doi> doi> 1.3 Meanings of “identifier”
[2] “infrastructure specifications”: specifying how to make labels actionable Do not generate a label, but if you have one, specify how to use it in some particular context URN: Uniform Resource name URI: Uniform [Universal] Resource Identifier PURL: Persistent Uniform Resource Locator e.g. ISBN as URN Note same concept in also in other non-digital contexts e.g. ISBN as EAN (978….) bar code or RFID

doi> doi> doi> 1.3 Meanings of “identifier”
[3] “implemented systems” Implement labels, through actionable specification, in a managed way EAN/UPC: physical product codes : implement ISO bar codes, RFIDs in the supply chain DOI: digital object identifiers : implement URN/URIs in intellectual property (+metadata, policy) doi>

doi> doi> doi> 1.3 Meanings of “identifier”
“For use on the Internet, an ISBN label can become a URN specification; an ISBN label can be incorporated into a DOI, which is an implemented identifier system following the URI specification.” Is clearer than “an ISBN identifier can become a URN identifier; an ISBN identifier can be incorporated into a Digital Object identifier, which is an implemented URI identifier” (?) A particular use of the word may be a mix of meanings [1], [2]& [3]

1.4 Persistence doi>

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

5 Dec 2002 doi> doi> doi> URL URL 404 File not found URL URL URL URL URL URL Content URL URL "Linkrot": recent estimates 16% in 6 months URL URL (c) IDF 2002

doi> doi> doi> Redirection (resolution) e.g. DOI Assigner
URL doi> doi> doi> Redirection (resolution) e.g. DOI Assigner Content DOI directory DOI directory DOI directory Content

doi> doi> doi> Assigner Assigner More than just "locate"
Response Page purchase content view free excerpt get related items get archive copy request permissions Assigner Assigner DOI directory Content More than just "locate"

doi> doi> doi> Assigner Archive Response Page
purchase content view free excerpt get related items get archive copy request permissions DOI directory purchase content Archive

5 Dec 2002 1.4 Persistence doi> Persistent identifier Resolution (redirection) Persistence of the associated metadata Persistence of the resolution system Persistence of the identified copy digital preservation: migration, emulation, encapsulation Persistence is a matter of social infrastructure Technology can help but not guarantee (c) IDF 2002

doi> doi> doi> Internet: DOI, URN, URL, PURL
Distinguish two issues: The technical specification of “what is” a URN and a URI etc. identifiers in sense [2] 2. What this means for practical implementation identifiers in sense [3]

doi> doi> doi> Internet persistent id specs See DOI Handbook
4.9 DOI as a URI 4.10 DOI as a URN 6.10 DOI and PURL Aim: persistent across time and unique across network space; useful and implemented PURLs are tied to http and are single redirect etc. URI/URNs are intended to be abstract names independent of protocols (approx) DOIs are URIs (formal specification) DOIs are URNs (in effect) URN and URI proponents disagree (& there are other proposed specs e.g. ARK)

doi> doi> Internet persistent id specs
(But largely from IETF, W3C did not see need for URN) URI URN URL Resolution (N2L) urn: ftp: gopher: http:

doi> doi> doi> DOI as URI
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); 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”) On its own, it’s just a specification! Requires code distribution for any implementation

doi> doi> doi> DOI as URN URN is less clear:
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 urn:isbn: can be defined ; but what does it do over and above isbn: ? neither have a readily available, well known, global, resolution A DOI is more than URN or URI Adds Policy, business rules, business model Adds Metadata specifications (cf ISBN, EAN, Visa)

doi> doi> doi> 2. “Keep a copy” A B
Digital preservation is “keeping a copy” What is it you are archiving? (or managing, or counting) What’s a copy? Something that is “the same as ” Is A the same as B? Consider a photocopy….text; author; work; paper; spatial location…. A ….etc B

doi> doi> doi> 2. “Keep a copy” A B
“Is A the same as B?” is meaningless Can only say “Is A the same as B for the purpose of…?” “the same” for some is “two different things” for others Purpose is defined by attributes “Nothing exists until is identified” …and its relevant attributes identified Structured metadata is needed (e.g. ONIX for digital preservation?) A B

doi> doi> doi> 3.1 Accessing the definitive copy
“How can an identifier be used to locate a specific local copy, which may have different access rights?” [see FAQ 26] Resolution of identifiers to global services. Contextualization of requests to those services to local requirements. split this into separate global and subsequent delegated local resolution steps e.g. OpenURL a globally-maintained database is clearly the wrong place to hold information on every local collection. ("Linking to the Appropriate Copy: Report of a DOI-Based Prototype"; (O. Beit-Arie, et. al.) D-Lib Magazine, September 2001) A definitive archive copy could be separately identified (with its own DOI) – a matter of policy Functional granularity

doi> 3.2 Rights framework ISO/IEC MPEG-21 as exemplar
Digital item: a structured digital object with a standard representation, identification and metadata The fundamental unit of distribution & transaction in the MPEG-21 framework Maps to “Digital Object” (DOI, Digital Object Architecture) or “Resource” (IETF) "Digital objects provide a means of organizing and identifying content for purposes of storage, access or distribution… …metadata may include restrictions on access to digital objects, notices of ownership, and licensing agreements…" (

Rights Expression Language
3.2 Rights framework Use Enforcement of rights & permissions DRM Technology Platform Application layer Rendering, environment etc. Expression layer Rights Expression Language Machine-capable interpretation of rights: XRML etc Vocabulary layer Rights metadata Data Dictionary Metadata set 1 Metadata set 2

doi> 3.2 Rights framework
Standards infrastructure must accommodate many different components (MPEG 21 standard is many parts) But a structured digital object with a standard representation, identification and metadata is "The fundamental unit” Must be interoperable with existing metadata standards - e.g. ONIX, SMPTE so need Dictionaries MPEG 21 Rights Data Dictionary & Rights Expression Language Purpose: "To achieve the goal of expressing rights for all Users of MPEG-21’s Digital Items"

doi> Describing rights using (meta)data
Primary rights events (claims, deals) are described using pieces of data: Rights Statement (“claim”) [party] owns [right] in [creation] in [time] and [place] Rights Agreement (“deal”) [party] agreed with [party] in [time] and [place] that [event] Pieces of "rights metadata" used in each semantic structure

doi> Describing rights using (meta)data
Primary rights events (claims, deals) are described using pieces of data: Rights Statement (“claim”) [party] owns [right] in [creation] in [time] and [place] Rights Agreement (“deal”) [party] agreed with [party] in [time] and [place] that [event] Creations typically have standard identifiers, which may have associated structured data, or which may act as keys to get this data Other pieces of data also need standard identifiers (time, party..)

doi> What is "rights metadata"? A mix of data from many sources:
Rights “events” Statements, agreements, transfers, permissions, prohibitions, requirements, assertions, approvals

doi> What is “rights metadata”? A mix of data from many sources:
Rights “events” Descriptive metadata Creations, Creation types, contributor roles, user roles, tools, classifications, measures

Rights “events” Descriptive metadata Legal metadata Rights, persons, intellectual property

Rights “events” Descriptive metadata Legal metadata Financial metadata Terms, conventions These sets of “rights metadata" are standardized and maintained in different places.

doi> Distributed rights management
This mix of data from many sources is used in many different places by different people in chains of rights events: agreement transfer statement permission prohibition assertion requirement etc [party] can [verb] [amount] to [creation] at [time] in [place]. Each entity can be expanded to reveal more data

5 Dec 2002 Distributed rights management doi> agreement transfer statement permission prohibition assertion requirement etc Each of these is an information object –an entity - which may need to link to or use information objects in other databases. The information used by each must therefore be standardised/interoperable (c) IDF 2002

Yes: work already done which shows how
3.2 Rights framework doi> Is there a way of getting to this "interoperation of data from many sources"? Yes: work already done which shows how

doi> indecs (www.indecs.org)
Interoperability of Data in E-Commerce Systems Produced principles for structured metadata and basis for a data dictionary for interoperability Principles used by DOI, ONIX, etc Applicable to other structured approaches e.g. SMPTE (and creates means of interoperability with them) Now extended to rights transactions: <indecs>2 rdd Consortium (includes IDF) Accepted as basis of MPEG-21 Rights Data Dictionary

5 Dec 2002 The MPEG-21 RDD doi> A data dictionary is a place where the process of semantics definitions meets technology MPEG standards have traditionally been about engineering solutions MPEG-21 is a multimedia and a lifecycle framework: its rights terminology does not exist in a vacuum Interacts with a large number of existing and developing schemes and systems The number of terms involved is likely to grow steadily and significantly MPEG-21 is taking the lead in establishing an RDD; it is likely to be widely supported if it is flexible and interoperable (c) IDF 2002

5 Dec 2002 Rights & description are interdependent (1) doi> “Rights” metadata describes what people can (or can’t) do with assets, and when, where, how and with what they can do it. “Descriptive” metadata describes what people did with assets: the same thing, but in the past. The majority of terms are common. Any descriptive term may be relevant to the conditions of an agreement When new works are created through derivation, aggregation or copying, new descriptions are needed which rely on both descriptive & rights metadata (c) IDF 2002

5 Dec 2002 Rights & description are interdependent (2) doi> Ownership changes and changes of law or jurisdiction often require querying of descriptive metadata for implementation in systems “Requirements” can be dependent on description in complex (and unfamiliar) ways Terms from descriptive schemes such as ONIX, Mi3P, DOI-NS, PRISM, MPEG7 Descriptor Schemes, DC and SCORM (and many others) will need to be integrated with any effective RDD (c) IDF 2002

5 Dec 2002 Relationship with other metadata schemes doi> Many content metadata schemes are in use and development and there will be many more These all impact on rights descriptions. Users will be reluctant (or unable) to adopt separate terms for “rights” descriptions automated interoperability into and out of RDD terms needed Users need to describe “non-digital” rights in tandem with digital The meaning of terms in external schemes must be fully mapped to RDD terms so that they form a part of the available data dictionary and enable users to automate their participation (c) IDF 2002

5 Dec 2002 <indecs> Data Dictionary doi> To provide a method for generating a set of clear, consistent, structured and integrated terms and definitions, to the required level of granularity, for an MPEG Rights Data Dictionary To provide a comprehensive methodology for the interoperability of terms from different schemes and systems used in the management of rights and permissions through mapping. Will be used by DOI Application Profiles DOIs can deliver this required interoperability To describe but in no way prescribe how rights and permissions operate To provide a framework for future governance. (c) IDF 2002

doi> Additional material
“DRM Technology: Identification and Metadata” Norman Paskin In: Digital Rights Management: Technical, Economic, Juridical and Political Aspects (ed. Becker et al) Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science series In press "Towards a Rights Data Dictionary - Identifiers and Semantics at work on the net". imi insights, June 2002 (subscription access) Copies available from author on request

5 Dec 2002 Norman Paskin, International DOI Foundation doi> (c) IDF 2002

Digital preservation: identifiers and rights

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Digital preservation: identifiers and rights"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Digital preservation: identifiers and rights

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Digital preservation: identifiers and rights"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback