I am forwarding the following request on behalf of NISO's Institutional Identifier Working Group
co-chairs. Thanks in advance for your attention.

Cindy Hepfer
Head, Electronic Periodicals Management and Continuing Resources Cataloging
University at Buffalo (SUNY)
hslcindy@buffalo.edu
=======
The NISO I2 Working Group has released a midterm report:
http://www.niso.org/workrooms/i2/midtermreport/

The NISO I2 WG is soliciting feedback on the report and guidance for the next steps in developing
this standard from individuals and groups involved in the digital information transactions.
Stakeholders include publishers/distributors, libraries, archives, museums,   licensing agencies,
standards bodies, and service providers, such as library workflow management system vendors and
copyright clearance agencies. Anyone involved at any level in the distribution, licensing, sharing
or management of information is invited to participate.

Please read the information below and participate in the evaluation of our midterm work by reading
the midterm release document and answering a few questions about each development area.  You are
the stakeholders for this information standard.  We must work to ensure that it meets your needs,
so your input is very valuable and important to us.

Background: NISO established the  working group in 2008 to develop an institutional identifier
(I2) to uniquely identify institutions engaged in the digital information workspace.  The goal of
the I2 Working Group is to develop an institutional identifier that is globally unique, robust,
interoperable, scalable and able to integrate smoothly with current digital  information
workflows.

The working group is currently at the midterm of its efforts and hopes to complete its draft
specification by December, 2010.  Community input was requested through surveys and conferences to
refine the objectives, create the metadata and identify scenarios of need.   We are currently
soliciting midterm review to provide confirmation of our work to date, course correction as needed
and to ensure that we have identified and are addressing all the issues surrounding this critical
enabling standard.

The problem space:  Obtaining, using, sharing, storing and managing  information often involves
multiple institutions across the digital information space.  These institutions must be able to
identify each other and to trust that the identification is both correct and unique.  The
information managed may itself be digital (e.g., the licensing of an e-book) or analog information
that is managed over the digital information space (e.g., interlibrary loan  of a physical book).
Currently, there are many identifiers in use, ranging from simple naming to  established codes.
However, no single identifier that is globally unique, trustworthy, and able to capture
relationships among institutions and variant legacy identifiers for institutions currently
exists.  As a result, transactions are locked into proprietary workflow silos and management of
all the digital information activities of an institution are not integrated.

The proposed solution:  The I2 is proposed as a globally unique, robust, scalable and
interoperable identifier with the sole purpose of uniquely identifying institutions.   The I2
consists of  two parts: an identifier standard that includes the metadata needed to uniquely
identify  t the organization -- including documenting relationships with other institutions that
are critical for establishing identity -- and a framework for implementation and use.

The I2 is envisioned as a simple, core identifier with the sole purpose of identifying
institutions in a robust and trustworthy manner.  Workflow-specific implementations, such as
regional ILL collaborations or ebook licensing services, will leverage the I2.

The benefit: Institutions will only have to request and reuse a single identifier.  Institutions
will be able to robustly identify every institution engaged in an information transaction.
Institutions that engage in many different information transactions or that  work with many
different institutions will be able to track and manage institutional activities across multiple
workflows through the use of a single, authoritative identifier.

The Midterm status report and review survey are available at the following link.  Please respond
by August 2, 2010.  Thank you very much for your support of this lynchpin digital information
standard!  Your input is very valuable to us and will be carefully studied and considered.

Link to obtain report and complete survey.  (Please download report and keep it open to assist you
in completing the survey):
http://www.niso.org/workrooms/i2/midtermreport/

Thank you for your support.

Grace Agnew, Rutgers University Libraries

Oliver Pesch, EBSCO

Co-chairs, NISO I2 Working Group