- From: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:55:09 -0400
- To: Viljanen Kim <kim.viljanen@aalto.fi>
- Cc: Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider@deri.org>, Emmanuelle Bermes <manue@figoblog.org>, "Koster, Lukas" <L.Koster@uva.nl>, "public-lld@w3.org" <public-lld@w3.org>
> On 27 Apr 2011, at 10:27, Emmanuelle Bermes wrote: > Libraries have a story of being concerned with persistence of > identifiers, which has led to the creation of schemes such as DOI, > URN, ARK etc. The advantage is to guarantee the central authority. But > it tends to create undesired complexity. Maybe even if it's a > non-library problem, we should tell libraries that HTTP URIs are OK if > they are managed well. > > +1 to that! +1 from me too ... it would be really great to see recommendations that specifically presented URLs (HTTP URIs) as a logical and viable alternative to identifier schemes that are typically more trusted in the library space: URN, ARK, DOI, Handle, etc. To paraphrase John Kunze: "Just because the URL was the last thing to see a resource alive doesn't mean it was the murderer." :-) //Ed
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2011 12:55:37 UTC