W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > August 2007

RE: Does follow-your-nose apply in the enterprise? was: RDF for molecules, using InChI

From: Michel_Dumontier <Michel_Dumontier@carleton.ca>
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 11:03:11 -0400
To: wangxiao@musc.edu, ogbujic@ccf.org
Cc: public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Message-id: <AB349814F1ECB143A5D4CD29C7A645690192DAF6@CCSEXB10.CUNET.CARLETON.CA>

> Chimezie,
> > The employee wants to build an ontology and doesn't have control
> > web space.  She considers using the tag scheme instead of an HTTP
> > (with a bogus domain name such as
> > http://example.com/clinical-medicine/surgical-procedures#minimally-
> invasive-procedure) because the latter scenario would result in the
use of
> the HTTP scheme which incorrectly suggests (to "follow-you-nose
> Web agents" - there is growing number of such software) that they
> to unnecessarily dereference the terms for more 'useful' information.
> >
> But this is a "pyschological" issue, not a "technical one". If the
> employee didn't invoke LSID library to request the allocation of the
> LSID URIs space, she is not using LSID.  Is there any difference
> a bogus LSID URI and a bogus HTTP URI?  If she doesn't intend to
> her ontology on the web, why is she bothered by the "follow-you-nose
> Semantic Web agents"? I don't know what "follow-you-nose Semantic Web
> agents" that you have in mind, but do they treat a HTTP 404 resource
> differently follow a "can-not-follow-resource"?
> Xiaoshu

While arguments can be made for using any URI as a unique identifier, it
follows that the use of a specific scheme such as HTTP URI or an LSID
URI has specific dereferencing protocols. LSIDs are particularly useful
when that there is more than one metadata provider that a given
authority knows about, where the authority has no control over or
knowledge of the metadata provided by these third-parties [1]. 

In complete contrast to both of these is the case where a user like me,
has no intent to publish any documents on the web, but requires a stable
identifier to make statements about things. Sure, HTTP URIs can be used
as identifiers, but why would I mint arbitrary HTTP URIs when I can use
a scheme that has no resolution protocol implicitly or explicitly
associated with it? 


[1] Personal communication with Mark Wilkinson
Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2007 15:03:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:20:29 UTC