OWG exists to reconcile identity across disparate sources.
OWG does not replace source systems.
OWG records relationships between source identifiers and OWG identifiers so that catalogs, libraries, publishers, repositories, and software systems can determine when they are talking about the same entity.
Sources provide assertions.
Examples include:
Sources remain valuable in their own right.
OWG should preserve source identity, source identifiers, and provenance whenever possible.
A source assertion is a claim made by a source system.
An OWG reconciliation is the current OWG position about how source assertions relate to OWG identifiers.
OWG should not collapse disagreement into false certainty.
When sources disagree, OWG should preserve enough provenance and history for consumers and stewards to understand the basis of the reconciliation decision.
An OWG identifier acts as a reconciliation target.
Multiple source identifiers may refer to the same OWG identifier.
For example:
OWG records how these identifiers relate to OWG entities.
Stewardship is the process by which OWG participants review assertions, reconcile identities, resolve disagreements, and improve mappings.
Stewardship should be collaborative, public, attributable, and evidence-based.
Where possible, improvements discovered through OWG should flow back to the systems where they belong.
OWG seeks interoperability, not isolation.
Resolution is a service layered on top of identity and reconciliation.
The public resolver is the canonical publication point for OWG reconciliation outcomes.
Alternative resolvers may exist, but they do not supersede the canonical OWG position unless governance explicitly changes the canonical authority.
Identity remains stable regardless of resolver implementation.
Consumers should be able to inspect:
A useful question for OWG proposals is:
Does this make identity easier to reconcile across systems?
If not, it may be outside the core mission of OWG.