W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > March 2010

Re: National Identification Number URIs ( NIN URIs )

From: Bernhard Schandl <bernhard.schandl@univie.ac.at>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 13:19:06 +0100
Cc: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Aldo Bucchi <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-Id: <FDC5D80F-0452-460E-8253-C7ADC6F8DDE8@univie.ac.at>
To: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>

On Mar 8, 2010, at 10:28 , Peter Ansell wrote:

>> Can you explain in more detail what the problem is with using DOI/URN/...-based identifiers internally, and expose them as de-referenceable HTTP URIs on-the-fly? One can even include a reference to the "plain" URN and thus map distinct datasets to each other based on URNs.
> To fulfill Linked Data principles you would have to link your HTTP URI
> directly to the other server's HTTP URI. Linked Data is designed to
> avoid the issue in your example.

Which issue do you mean? 

> In your example the fact that there
> is a link can only be figured out using some external service that
> knows about both data sources.

Sure. Before I can add a link to any data set, I have to detect it using some heuristics. Shared URN/DOI/... identifiers seem a valid approach for this -- think of ISBN numbers.

> If your server was Linked Data and not
> just an HTTP URI based RDF database then it would link out using HTTP
> URI's and both servers could be directly explored without some
> external service.

Once the link has been detected, I can of course add it to both data sets. Well, the owner of the datasets can.

Received on Monday, 8 March 2010 12:19:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:16:03 UTC