Re: IDs + 5; everybody - 10

>>>>> "JR" == Jonathan Rees <jonathan.rees@gmail.com> writes:

  JR> Well, to do a fair comparison of LSID URIs and HTTP URIs, you would have
  JR> to take all the features you need, see how to best implement them in
  JR> both contexts, and then make an overall assessment. 

  JR> What is your worry, by the way? Would bringing the benefits of LSIDs to
  JR> other parts of the URI space be a bad thing?

Well, 3 or 4 years ago I sat in a meeting running over exactly this
ground. That time the comparison was to handles. And, now, several years
later, we are comparing to pURLs.


  JR> There is the criticism of HTTP URIs that they cannot be used as
  JR> identifiers, and I admit that the pun with URLs can be misleading.

It is misleading period. 


  JR> To repeat, I'm just trying to be objective. I am not in a position to
  JR> make decisions; I am just trying to elucidate the comparison between the
  JR> two naming schemes so that HCLS can make a rational decision. I was the
  JR> one at the Amsterdam HCLS meeting, at which there were no LSID
  JR> defenders, saying that we ought to listen to what LSID users have to
  JR> say, and in many private conversations I have been coming to the defense
  JR> of benefits that LSIDs have that HTTP URIs so far lack. And I've finally
  JR> gotten around to reading the darned spec. So I hope you LSIDers don't
  JR> think you're being dissed.

My suspicion is that you won't find any LSID defenders for the reason that the
people who designed the spec do not want to listen to essentially the same
arguments again. 

My problem with this whole process is that you are missing the most important
criterion for comparing identifier schemes. They all basically work, as far as
I can see, they all basically do the same job. There are technical differences
between them but, frankly, they are not that great. 

So what I want to know is, what is the difference between DOIs and blog
permalinks? Both of these have been taken up, in a way that LSIDs or anything
in life sciences have not. Perhaps it is because the library and publishing
community have had something like this (the ISBN and associated identifiers)
for a long time already. 

My question, then, is not what do the identifiers, but what will people use. 

Phil

Received on Thursday, 19 July 2007 13:30:02 UTC