- From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:27:15 -0500
- To: "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, <public-lld@w3.org>
It's still reasonable to use "info" URIs (RFC 4451) despite fact that new "namespaces" are no longer being considered: http://info-uri.info/registry/OAIHandler?verb=ListRecords&metadataPrefix=oai_dc "info" URIs don't benefit from the HTTP protocol the way Linked Data "http" URIs are, but they call still be used in RDF to an identify an rdf:Resource/owl:Thing. Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net] > Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 8:01 PM > To: public-lld@w3.org > Subject: Re: A better solution for legacy IDs? > > Quoting Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>: > > > > > > Can you expand on 'too large'? You can fit breathtaking amounts of > data on > > a USB stick - or Web site - these days. What kind of size are we > looking > > at? Is the problem admin/social (eg. Decentralization expected) or > > technical or a mix? > > Dan, I didn't mean "large" in the "bytes" sense but in the sense of > human effort to mint and maintain a unique property for each possible > type of identifier. It just seems easier to me to have an "identifier" > property (or graph) that is a single URI, but which takes the > identifier as a value, along with a code giving the source/agency/etc. > There are institution and organization codes that will probably cover > most of the identifier-producing agencies. In non-linked data we often > see things like "PMID:123456" or "eISSN:2344-8765". This would be the > same, but would be an http URI. I realize that there isn't a great > deal of overhead to minting a URI but my experience is that many folks > will hesitate before doing so. Treating the legacy identifiers as > values will probably get more uptake. > > Admittedly, the edge cases will not be well controlled and we'll get > some identifiers that are expressed in more than one way. That happens > now in the pre-LD world; we'll have to live with that. But at least to > have some agreement on a graph structure would be a step forward, IMO. > > So, Tom, I think that answers your question: I'm mainly looking for a > property/graph that will take values, but I will look more closely at > the Freebase schema. Is it possible to add to the Freebase identifier > hierarchy "at will"? Are there limitations on who can mint a new > property? And for the Freebase namespaces that refer to an http URI > elsewhere (like the LC catalog numbers), where is the connection made > to the URI? I couldn't find that link. > > Thanks, > > kc > > > > > Dan > > > >> Has anyone developed and published a good "legacy identifier graph" > that > > we could adopt? If not, would someone like to propose one? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> kc > >> > >> -- > >> Karen Coyle > >> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > >> ph: 1-510-540-7596 > >> m: 1-510-435-8234 > >> skype: kcoylenet > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Karen Coyle > kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > ph: 1-510-540-7596 > m: 1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet > >
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2011 01:30:07 UTC