W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > March 2010

Re: National Identification Number URIs ( NIN URIs )

From: Bernhard Schandl <bernhard.schandl@univie.ac.at>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:34:48 +0100
Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Aldo Bucchi <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D9FCA649-CCF2-420D-B15D-0B88A58C8F3E@univie.ac.at>
To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>

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?

Received on Monday, 8 March 2010 08:36:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:20:57 UTC