Re: Datatypes with no (cool) URI

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:38 AM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-04-03 at 14:33 +0100, Phil Archer wrote:
>> [ . . . ] The actual URI for it is
>> http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=36266
>> (or rather, that's the page about the spec but that's a side issue for
>> now).
>>
>> That URI is just horrible and certainly not a 'cool URI'. The Eurostat
>> one is no better.
>>
>> Does the datatype URI have to resolve to anything (in theory no, but in
>> practice? Would a URN be appropriate?
>
> It's helpful to be able to click on the URI to figure out what exactly
> was meant.  How about just using a URI shortener, such as tinyurl.com or
> bit.ly?

David's good point raises an even bigger point: why isn't ISO minting
DOI's for specs?

Or, at least, why can't ISO manage a DOI-equivalent space that would
rein-in bogusly-long URIs, make them more manageable, and perhaps more
functional e.g. CrossRef's Linked Data-savvy DOI proxy
<http://bit.ly/HcStYl>


-- 
John S. Erickson, Ph.D.
Director, Web Science Operations
Tetherless World Constellation (RPI)
<http://tw.rpi.edu> <olyerickson@gmail.com>
Twitter & Skype: olyerickson

Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2012 14:53:37 UTC