- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 08:51:45 -0800
- To: Diane Hillmann <metadata.maven@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Yes, I don't think we should *prevent* any identifiers, but in fact anything that is in URI form can be added. The problem is (oh, and this will sound familiar :-)) which do we add as named properties to the schema? So now that takes us back to the identifier proposals [1] [2] which we dropped because it made our heads spin. I'll give you my gut reaction: make a "any ol' identifier" property and let people put into it whatever they want, with the hope that in the future more will have a URI form. Meanwhile, if you want to use a non-URI identifier, ... good luck! kc [1] http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Identifier [2] http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Identifier-2 On 11/23/13 8:42 AM, Diane Hillmann wrote: > KC et al.: > > I suspect that in this time of turmoil, the 'perfect' identifier is even > more of a holy grail than it used to be. Given that we're not yet at the > point where best choices can be made (much less enforced), I'd be > inclined to add any identifier I could find that seems relevant, and let > the future sort them out. It's hard to know looking ahead what we'll end > up doing, but I suspect none of our crystal balls are very useful at the > moment. > > Diane > > > > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net > <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote: > > :-) These are those times when a "neutral point of view" just > doesn't say it all, does it? > > Thanks, Laura, for your perspective. I'm not at the kitten killing > level yet, but I, too, find e-issn to be an aberration -- it's the > ISSN-L that makes me want to strangle. > > kc > > On 11/22/13 3:21 PM, LAURA DAWSON wrote: > > The book trade suffers from the occasional reference to eISBN. > The ISBN agency tries very hard to stamp those out. I once gave > a presentation for NISO called "Every Time You Say eISBN, a > Kitten Bleeds." > > With that perspective, I hope the eISSN dies a mangled and > horrible death. > > On Nov 22, 2013, at 6:10 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net > <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote: > > One of the examples I added includes the E-ISSN. I have > mixed feelings about this, but I suspect it is quite common > in metadata. (It seems to me that it should be an ISSN > attached to an electronic publication, not a different kind > of ISSN... oh well.) There is also the ISSN-L, which > fortunately does not seem to be referred to much, so I hope > we can ignore it. > > If you haven't run into ISSN-L, it is the ISSN of the print > copy, and is presumably used to gather the various formats > (E, print, whatever) together. The "L" stands for "linking." > From the ISSN agency page: > > ISSN-L 0264-2875 > Printed version: Dance research = ISSN 0264-2875 > Online version: Dance research (Online) = ISSN > 1750-0095 > > If you know of a growing use of these, please speak up. I > haven't run into them, but I'm not watching any serials > databases carefully. Also, if E-ISSNs are falling out of > use, then we can skip those. Anyone? > > kc > -- > Karen Coyle > kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net > m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234> > skype: kcoylenet > > > > -- > Karen Coyle > kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net > m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234> > skype: kcoylenet > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Saturday, 23 November 2013 16:52:13 UTC