RE: [Fwd: Re: identifier to use]

hi all,

> Is there any chance that this will find it's way back into 
> the LSID spec?

great thought but...

the spec is an OMG spec through the Life Sciences working group.  i3c
worked on it in collaboration with this group but i3c is dead and the
members of the Life Sciences group most interested in the LSID are no
longer members per se (not sure quite how true this is, IBM is still a
member of OMG and sean martin did a great deal of the (excellent) work
on the spec and implementation but i don't know how much interest they
would have).  the OMG revision process is quite straight-forward,
especially for something of this nature, but there have to be OMG
members interested in doing the work.

not to say there aren't other venues, including de facto adoption.

cheers,
michael

Michael Miller
Lead Software Developer
Rosetta Biosoftware Business Unit
www.rosettabio.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Eric Jain
> Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 5:38 AM
> To: Ricardo Pereira
> Cc: public-semweb-lifesci
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: identifier to use]
> 
> 
> Ricardo Pereira wrote:
> > 
> http://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/GUID/LsidHttpProxyUsageRec
> ommendation
> 
> Looks like a good solution for people who are using LSID (for 
> whatever 
> reason) and want to make their data more accessible on the 
> Semantic Web!
> 
> Together with the content negotiation mechanism described in 
> one of the 
> comments on this page, this could also make resolving an LSID into 
> something useful (for normal people) as easy as resolving e.g. a DOI.
> 
> Is there any chance that this will find it's way back into 
> the LSID spec?
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Saturday, 25 August 2007 18:29:19 UTC