- From: Phillip Lord <p.lord@russet.org.uk>
- Date: 22 Apr 2004 10:36:09 +0100
- To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
>>>>> "Greg" == Greg Tyrelle <greg@tyrelle.net> writes: Greg> | Greg> | '/wormbase/das/elegans/features?segment=CHROMOSOME_I:1000,2000' Greg> | Greg> | Greg> | This leads the programmer and biologist to certain conclusions Greg> |about query semantics Greg> Both LSIDs and URLs are URIs, in which case they are intended Greg> to be opaque identifiers. You are not meant to infer anything Greg> about the resource from the URI ? I believe this is a case of Greg> using URIs incorrectly [1], not that HTTP URIs are broken. It's applying extra semantics to the URL which it is not supposed to have. This is not that URI's are being used incorrectly, it's just that as specified they do not do all that they need to. Greg> If my "agent" is to add this hypothesis to it's KB, I might Greg> instruct it to find more information about the processes Greg> involved (assuming I don't already have this knowledge). If Greg> the GO terms and GIs were HTTP URIs I can dereference them to Greg> (hopefully) retrieve some useful information about those Greg> resources. However with LSID I must have the necessary Greg> infrastructure in place (resolvers, clients etc.). You need infrastructure to resolve a HTTP URI as well. The question is whether the extra infrastructure you need for a LSID is worth the effort. Greg> I have ignored the issue of retrieving the "object" vs. a Greg> description of the "object" in this case. I think LSID's address this well. Greg> |By encoding things with URI's we do not guard against the Greg> fact that the |underlying data may change. Greg> Why do we need to guard against the underlying data changing ? This is one of the main issues in the use of identifiers in bioinformatics. They identify two things: a specific data set, such as a sequence; and the biological entity. The former is less stable than the latter. A lot of databases have identifiers, which do not change (very frequently) and accessions (which change when the data is updated). If you can't cope with versions then you have to keep every past version of the database around or URL's will become out of date. Or you apply some new semantics. This has happened on the web. "http://news.bbc.co.uk" does not identify a specific document, but the current version of a specific document. It changes every hour or so. Greg> | This leads me to a question about "persistent" URI's and Greg> URL's |(PURLS's): How do you ensure that two URI's are Greg> pointing at the same |object (bytes)? If we can collectively Greg> answer this question we can |encode an LSID any way we Greg> please as long as we keep in mind that this |information Greg> must persist as long as a journal or other well vetted Greg> |scientific medium. Greg> You will not be able to "technically" insure two URIs are not Greg> pointing at the same object using LSID or HTTP URIs IMO. Also Greg> if LSIDs are going to be use to identify "concepts", what is Greg> to say that two authorities will have LSIDs for the concept Greg> p53 ? This is especially important considering their use in Greg> RDF to identify "resources". Greg> Encoding LSID as a HTTP URIs seems to be a way forward. Maybe Greg> some kind of mapping: Greg> URN:LSID:example.com:12345:1 Greg> http://example.com.lsid.org/12345/1 But surely, this URL wouldn't be expected to resolve? Phil
Received on Thursday, 22 April 2004 07:15:31 UTC