- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 09:40:06 -0500
- To: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Bernhard Schandl wrote: > Hugh, > > >> Maybe I am still misunderstanding, but I think that you rare still saying >> that a urn/doi approach is compatible with Linked Data, or at least is not >> harmful. >> I think differently. >> urn/doi is harmful - once it comes into existence, it is very hard to avoid >> the problems of people using them, and then you have to start working out >> where the server might be. >> I am quite happy with people passing round http://foo.com/bar/urn:baz.quex, >> as this is resolvable; I just don't want things that don't use http. >> >> I think Bernhard's questions suggest that your comments might have been >> misinterpreted by him as I did, that urn: is acceptable as a Linked Data >> URI. >> > > I didn't understand it that way. My question came from my objections against storing full dereferenceable HTTP URIs in a database, as this makes it difficult to migrate and distribute data. > > My question was: are there any objections against using URNs internally (i.e., within a database/triple store/file system/whatsoever), which are dynamically rewritten to HTTP URIs when they are served to the outside? (btw, this is exactly what e.g., Pubby [1] does.) > Ditto Virtuoso [1] basically what you experience when you use DBpedia . > So it's a question of internal vs. external identifiers -- both have their (different) purposes. > Yes. Links: 1. http://www.openlinksw.com/virtuoso/Whitepapers/html/vdld_html/VirtDeployingLinkedDataGuide.html -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen > And second question: if you already have the URNs, are there objections against publishing them *alongside* the HTTP URIs (using owl:sameAs), and therefore allowing them to be used as strong indicators for equivalence when linking datasets? Think of ISBN numbers published as URNs [2] alongside with resolvable HTTP URIs. There is a known schema for ISBN URNs, so why not reuse it? > > [1] <http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/pubby/> > [2] <http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3187.html> > > Best > Bernhard > > >
Received on Monday, 8 March 2010 14:40:37 UTC