W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > August 2007

Re: identifier to use

From: Hilmar Lapp <hlapp@duke.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:25:40 -0400
Message-Id: <1C6DBF8A-4276-4A79-BF0C-7B9EDBFC04D1@duke.edu>
Cc: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>, public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
To: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>


On Aug 23, 2007, at 11:18 AM, Eric Jain wrote:

>
>> Almost no database, data center, or publisher uses HTTP URIs for  
>> identifying their digital objects, and stable HTTP URIs at present  
>> aren't adopted or the common denominator for identifying digital  
>> objects in the life science domain either. And that's not b/c it  
>> is technically difficult to do so, or because nobody knew that  
>> stable URIs are desirable.
>
> There are over a hundred databases I have to deal with in the  
> context of UniProt [see http://beta.uniprot.org/docs/dbxref], and  
> the one common thing they all have are URLs for their resources.  
> True, most URLs are not as stable and nice as we'd like them to be

Yeah, because they are URLs. But don't almost all of the databases  
you have listed there use identifiers (accession numbers, etc) for  
identifying their objects? Obviously, each one has their own (and  
volatile) way of translating their identifiers into a URL. That's  
(part of) the problem. So, yeah, they share a common thing, namely  
having a website and serving their holdings through HTTP, but they're  
not using URLs to identify their digital objects, are they?

	-hilmar
-- 
===========================================================
: Hilmar Lapp  -:-  Durham, NC  -:- hlapp at duke dot edu :
===========================================================
Received on Thursday, 23 August 2007 15:25:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:49 GMT