- From: Bernhard Schandl <bernhard.schandl@univie.ac.at>
- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 13:19:06 +0100
- To: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
- Cc: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Aldo Bucchi <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi, On Mar 8, 2010, at 10:28 , Peter Ansell wrote: >> 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. > > To fulfill Linked Data principles you would have to link your HTTP URI > directly to the other server's HTTP URI. Linked Data is designed to > avoid the issue in your example. Which issue do you mean? > In your example the fact that there > is a link can only be figured out using some external service that > knows about both data sources. Sure. Before I can add a link to any data set, I have to detect it using some heuristics. Shared URN/DOI/... identifiers seem a valid approach for this -- think of ISBN numbers. > If your server was Linked Data and not > just an HTTP URI based RDF database then it would link out using HTTP > URI's and both servers could be directly explored without some > external service. Once the link has been detected, I can of course add it to both data sets. Well, the owner of the datasets can. Best Bernhard
Received on Monday, 8 March 2010 12:19:39 UTC