- From: Bernhard Schandl <bernhard.schandl@univie.ac.at>
- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:34:48 +0100
- To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Aldo Bucchi <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi, On Mar 8, 2010, at 02:33 , Hugh Glaser wrote: > Design Issue Number 2 (http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html) says: > "Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names." > I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. > doi, urn suck. > It is hard to work out what they mean (resolve), and even if I can it is not > a distributed (web) system. Can you explain in more detail what the problem is with using DOI/URN/...-based identifiers internally, and expose them as de-referenceable HTTP URIs on-the-fly? One can even include a reference to the "plain" URN and thus map distinct datasets to each other based on URNs. For example, let's say I have data about <urn:uuid:70865e3a-ee74-4c8c-90e7-3958c6d06dc4> (not using a privacy-sensible identifier by purpose), and you have data about the same resource. Now, I expose this data via my Linked Data server, dynamically rewrite the URN and include a sameas triple, like <http://my.server.com/urn:uuid:70865e3a-ee74-4c8c-90e7-3958c6d06dc4> owl:sameAs <urn:uuid:70865e3a-ee74-4c8c-90e7-3958c6d06dc4> and you do the same, <http://your.server.com/urn:uuid:70865e3a-ee74-4c8c-90e7-3958c6d06dc4> owl:sameAs <urn:uuid:70865e3a-ee74-4c8c-90e7-3958c6d06dc4> we have fulfilled all Linked Data principles and can link our resources easily via the transitive sameAs closure. Good? Bad? Best, Bernhard
Received on Monday, 8 March 2010 08:36:21 UTC