RE: Re: alternate identifier draf

If ISO isn't up to the task, others can drag them into the future. For
example:

http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/iso639-1

Eventually they will understand the advantages.

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Morris [mailto:tfmorris@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 12:54 PM
> To: Young,Jeff (OR)
> Cc: Adrian Pohl; public-schemabibex@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Re: alternate identifier draf
> 
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
> wrote:
> > I agree that the pattern already exists and should be generalized
> instead of reinvented. The essential pattern is ultimately SKOS.
> Schema.org is making a mess by not realizing it.
> >
> > "String" identifiers are buggy whips.
> 
> If that were really true, we wouldn't be having this discussion
because
> the various identifier issuing organizations would have been
publishing
> URIs for their identifiers for years, if not decades.  What percentage
> of ISO identifiers (country codes, etc) have URIs minted for them by
> ISO?  What percentage for other popular organizations?
> 
> Tom

Received on Monday, 21 January 2013 20:25:43 UTC