Re: [dxwg] Dereferenceable identifiers [RDID] (#53)

short story:

I think what a user really needs to know is what is the identifier scheme (not who defined it), in particular, if those identifiers can be dereferenced, how  can they are dereferenced, and what kind of representations of the identified resource should be available. The agent defining the scheme is not the info needed for this use case.  Back to the original question, if identifiers are are required to be http: URIs, the base identifier scheme is known (http), but the practical matter is that various agent embed identifiers within the http uri, and the identifier scheme that matters to the user is not http, but what the embedded scheme is, e.g. doi, ark, igsn...

details
> a) the authority that defined the identifier scheme (DOI foundation), and
> b) the authority responsible for assigning and maintaining identifiers using that scheme (IEEE),

@riccardoAlbertoni yes you are interpreting my suggestion as intended, and I think @makxdekkers point about the registering agent is valid.

If a registered URI type is used ([following RFC-3986](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.1)), the identifier scheme is part of the URI; a separate identifier scheme property is redundant in that case.  If the skos:notation in the adms:identifier has type ^^xsd:anyURI, then the identifier for the scheme should be the prefix on the ID string ('http:' in the [example 7](https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/wiki/DCAT-Identifiers#representing--http-dereferenceable-secondary-identifier)).

DOI is registered as a namespace in the ['info' URI scheme](https://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes/uri-schemes.xhtml) (see [faq #11](https://www.doi.org/faq.html) ), so it would appear that to formally encode a DOI as an rfc 3986 URI it would look like 'info:doi/10.1109/5.771073'. The[ info namespace registry](https://info-uri.info/) was off line when I tried and check this.  

As far as dct:creator, it seems odd to me that the dct:creator property on an adms:Identifer is not the creator of the identifier instance, rather it is the creator of the identifier scheme. This would be confusing if one were not conversant in the usage recommendations for adms; if that's the convention we should stick with it.

To me, the major use case for knowing the identifier scheme is that it should tell you how you can dereference the identifier, and ideally what kind of representations for the identified resource are available, so there is no particular need to identify the agent responsible for actually issuing and maintaining the lifecycle of the identifier, in the case of a DOI, knowing the scheme lets a user know that the registering agent is specified by the prefix part of the id string and there are ways to dereference that.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by smrgeoinfo
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/53#issuecomment-441398673 using your GitHub account

Received on Saturday, 24 November 2018 22:04:24 UTC