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 14:54:02 +0100
Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Aldo Bucchi <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8CBF5B11-5B8B-4A06-9071-75330932CBC6@univie.ac.at>
To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Hugh,

> Maybe I am still misunderstanding, but I think that you rare still saying
> that a urn/doi approach is compatible with Linked Data, or at least is not
> harmful.
> I think differently.
> urn/doi is harmful - once it comes into existence, it is very hard to avoid
> the problems of people using them, and then you have to start working out
> where the server might be.
> I am quite happy with people passing round http://foo.com/bar/urn:baz.quex,
> as this is resolvable; I just don't want things that don't use http.
> 
> I think Bernhard's questions suggest that your comments might have been
> misinterpreted by him as I did, that urn: is acceptable as a Linked Data
> URI.

I didn't understand it that way. My question came from my objections against storing full dereferenceable HTTP URIs in a database, as this makes it difficult to migrate and distribute data.

My question was: are there any objections against using URNs internally (i.e., within a database/triple store/file system/whatsoever), which are dynamically rewritten to HTTP URIs when they are served to the outside? (btw, this is exactly what e.g., Pubby [1] does.)

So it's a question of internal vs. external identifiers -- both have their (different) purposes.

And second question: if you already have the URNs, are there objections against publishing them *alongside* the HTTP URIs (using owl:sameAs), and therefore allowing them to be used as strong indicators for equivalence when linking datasets? Think of ISBN numbers published as URNs [2] alongside with resolvable HTTP URIs. There is a known schema for ISBN URNs, so why not reuse it?

[1] <http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/pubby/>
[2] <http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3187.html>

Best
Bernhard
Received on Monday, 8 March 2010 13:54:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:25 UTC