The Case for Public Resource Identifiers A Call for Action

1. The Case for Public Resource IdentifiersA Call for Action Steve Pepper, Ontopia Identity, Reference, and the Web Workshop, Edinburgh, May 2006

2. About this presentation • Just a subset of my paper* for this workshop • 1. Introduction (on the need for identifiers) • 2. Requirements on a Global Identifier Mechanism • 3. Published Subjects • 4. Alternative Proposals • 5. Call to Action • Focus here is on the Call for Action • Expands on the ideas presented to the W3C AC • http://www.w3.org/2006/05/pepper • The Case for Published Subjects,http://www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/materials/The_Case_for_Published_Subjects.pdf

3. URIs and the Towers of Babel * • URIs constitute a universal way of naming things • This has tremendous potential • Globally unique, language-independent identifiers for any conceivable subject under the sun • We could finally stop building Towers of Babel • (Or at least make a real impression on info glut) * Whenever I say “URI”, please hear “IRI”

4. The Semantic Superhighway • At the very least, URIs give us the chance to create a “semantic superhighway” • A foundation for solving the problem of infoglut • A level of the Semantic Web below RDF • But it’s not happening • In fact, we are witnessing the creation of new Towers of Babel • New, redundant vocabularies appear daily • The potential is not being realised. Why?

5. Why the Potential is Not Being Realised • Too few people are using URIs as identifiers • It’s partly our fault • We don’t explain the benefits loudly enough • We don’t make it sufficiently easy and worthwhile • We’ve been in turmoil on technical issues • And those that do use URIs as identifiers tend to create new ones, rather than reuse existing ones • This defeats the purpose of a universal naming scheme

6. Problems We Need to Address • The concepts are too varied and confusing, and they are not being marketed well • The world perceives a Heinz 59 variety of URIs • IRI, URN, URL, http:URI, XRI, WPN, TDB, ... • Reuse hard in practice • No repositories to aid discovery • No simple way to figure out what a given identifier is supposed to identify

7. What We Need To Do • Make the concepts easy to understand and apply • Agree on one flavour of URI • Promote the hell out of it • Deprecate everything else • Encourage reuse in every possible way • Make it easy to discover and interpret identifiers • Encourage them to be made public

8. Make http:URIs the flavour of choice! • Already widely used in Topic Maps and RDF • And, increasingly, elsewhere • No longer subject to paralysing controversy • TAG’s resolution of httpRange-14 issue allows any http:URI (including slash http:URIs) to identify anything • Familiar to anyone who has used a web browser • Having people type http://... will not be a problem • Most importantly: They resolve easily when you click on them • So let’s exploit that fact...

9. Have them resolve to something useful! • The most useful thing to resolve to would be a descriptor • definition, description, some other kind of indication of what the identifier is intended to identify • (machine-processable information would be a useful “optional extra”) • Allows users to know what the identifier “means” • i.e., what it is intended to identify • ... and decide whether it is appropriate for them to use • Also easy to discover using web search engines

10. A Proposal for Public Resource Identifiers Three Key Principles: • A Public Resource Identifier (PRI – “pry”) is • an http:URI that has been minted for the explicit purpose of serving as an identifier • It resolves to a Public Resource Descriptor (PRD) • that describes which resource (subject) it identifies and states who minted it • ANYONE should be able to mint a PRI • A bottom-up mechanism (anarchic, like the Web) • Survival of the fittest (= the most trusted)

11. Sounds familiar? • Essentially identical to “Published Subjects” • Proposed by SC34 in 1999 as Public Subjects • Refined within OASIS as Published Subjects • Only major difference: • The requirement to use http:URIs • But also a restatement of basic Web Architecture principles • Cool URIs don’t change • http:URIs can identify anything • http:URIs should resolve to something useful • Does it matter what we call it? • (Does it even need a new name?) • “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet”

12. What’s in a Name? • Would this rose by any other name smell as sweet? • It’s a branding issue • Does the name have useful / non-useful connotations? • cf. “resource” and “subject” • Can we create cool TLAs (if necessary)? • pronouncable, depictable, available, distinguishable

13. A Call for Action: Incubator Group • Let the W3C and SC34 get together to push PRIs • The details can be hammered out in a few months • Then bring OASIS on board • (before even more vocabularies appear...) • Approach other standards bodies, including • SC32 (databases, meta data), SC36 (e-learning), IFLA, and others (TBD) • Let’s build a Semantic Superhighway together… • I will be making a formal proposal shortly

14. The PRI Incubator Group • A W3C activity with participation from ISO and OASIS • Chartered for < 12 months to • refine and codify the Three Key Principles • provide absolutely minimal recommendations for • the form of the PRI • the content of the PRD • address issues of branding and outreach • esp. naming and strategy for promulgating the paradigm

15. More on the PRI-XG • Suggested participation • 3 sponsors from W3C (TAG, SemWeb, ...) • Invited international experts from ISO SC34 • Invited experts from OASIS (UBL, OpenOffice) • Coordinator and team contact • Suggested goals • XG Report • Possible fast-track as W3C Rec and ISO Technical Report

16. The Continuation of a Fine Tradition • Diderot’s Encyclopédie (1751–1780) • THE DESCRIPTION OF EVERYTHING • Oxford English Dictionary (1857–1928) • THE MEANING OF EVERYTHING • Public Resource Identifiers (1999– ) • THE IDENTITY OF EVERYTHING X