Re: Sustainable Codes vs Volatile URIs Re: URIs / Ontology for Physical Units and Quantities

So, AFAICT, the options, for the UN/CEFACT code "SEC" are:


   1. https://example.un.org/ns/cefact/codes/SEC
   2. http://example.un.org/ns/cefact#SEC
   3. urn:x-un-cefact:SEC
   4. SEC

In terms of preference, I'd vote for 2, 3, 1, 4.

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 6:42 AM, Peter Krauss <ppkrauss@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> 2015-05-07 5:36 GMT-03:00 Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>:
>
>> (...) But to put in bluntly, in many cases, well-maintained codes for
>> standardized identities (languages, countries, towns, units ...) are more
>> sustainable ways to share identities than URIs,
>>
>
>
> Perhaps I am not understanding, but there are some conceptual mistake?
>  "codes" in this sense, for me, are URNs; and URNs are URIs... Incremental
> examples:
>
> * "codes" are things controlled at https://github.com/datasets
>
> * the code of "Avestan" is "ae" in
> https://github.com/datasets/language-codes
>
> * in my context (ex. my house or my LAN) I can use my URN definition,
> *   "urn:x-ok-datasets:language-codes:ae"  *
>     that is the "alpha2" column in
> https://github.com/datasets/language-codes/blob/master/data/language-codes.csv
>
>     and the "URN Resolution" is the conversion from "alpha2" column to the
> "English" column.
>     ... And so on... In the same URN-x-ok schema are many other code
> types,
>     like "*urn:x-ok-datasets:country-codes:us*" defined by
> https://github.com/datasets/country-codes/
>     we are not hostages of IANA, we can use URN for any code.
>
> so, codes are URNs ... We can agree about the "*code is URN*" assertion?
>
>
>


-- 
Wes Turner
https://westurner.org
https://wrdrd.com/docs/consulting/knowledge-engineering