W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > July 2006

Re: BioRDF: URI Best Practices

From: Sean Martin <sjmm@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:55:26 -0400
To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF1C072298.A455A8A3-ON852571B5.00455E04-852571B5.004C7C8E@us.ibm.com>
Hello Henry,

>I too would be interested in understanding why people in the life 
>sciences don't use URLs

The short answer is that I believe people in Life Sciences do use URLs for 
URIs  whenever they are appropriate.  We certainly do. However these posts 
I wrote in the last couple of weeks detail some of the problems with using 
URLs to name digital objects which is what we use LSIDs for. 


Kindest regards, Sean

Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> 
Sent by: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org
07/24/2006 06:45 AM

Sean Martin/Cambridge/IBM@IBMUS
Re: BioRDF: URI Best Practices

I too would be interested in understanding why people in the life 
sciences don't use URLs, because I think the advantage of using them 
is absolutely huge. Being able to "GET my meaning" [1] makes the 
Semantic web so easy to explain, so simple to read, so beautiful all 
in all that one really needs to have an amazing reason not to go that 


[1] http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/bblfish?entry=get_my_meaning

Home page: http://bblfish.net/
Sun Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/bblfish/

On 20 Jul 2006, at 12:57, Sean Martin wrote:

> hi Susie,
> Is there any chance that we can have a section that details the 
> pro's and con's of URL's as URIs in a Life Sciences setting.  It is 
> my understanding that the LSID URN was created in response to 
> certain short comings of URLs  as names  - but may well not have 
> over come them and so the various concerns may not be obvious with 
> just the one table suggested.
> Kindest regards, Sean
Received on Monday, 24 July 2006 13:55:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:20:17 UTC