- From: Paskin, Norman (DOI-ELS) <n.paskin@doi.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:44:53 +0100
- To: "'uri@w3.org'" <uri@w3.org>
No, URLs are not appropriate for designating physical items: 1. A physical item may exist in multiple copies. ISBNs for example do not refer to a specific copy of a book; they identify the class of all copies in an edition. It is useful to identify the class not a specific instance of it. 2. A user may well wish to differentiate between a website (URL) -e.g. for maintenenace, administration; and the entity currently avaiulable at that website. If the URl is used for one it cannot be used for the other. 3. For management of contnent many people require a persistent identifier. ....etc. See the indecs model (Framework) for a lucid discussion of all these points (http://www.indecs.org/results/archive.htm) -----Original Message----- From: Aaron Swartz [mailto:aswartz@upclink.com] Sent: 13 October 2000 22:47 To: uri@w3.org Subject: URIs for Physical Items With the increasing popularity of URIs, especially with their increased importance in RDF, it becomes more important than ever to have URIs for all sorts of items. Already, protocols like isbn: allow the use of some types of physical items, but this still leaves quite a lot left. Would it be appropriate to use the URLs to the websites of such items? For example, if I wanted to talk about my iBook, pointing to http://apple.com/ibook/ or does this refer to the homepage, rather than the item itself? I hope this is an appropriate topic of discussion for this list. If not, my apologies, and suggestion for a better place would be appreciated. Thanks a lot for your help, -- Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>| The Info Network <http://www.swartzfam.com/aaron/> | <http://theinfo.org> AIM: Jedi of Pi | ICQ: 33158237 | knowledge is power, drink it up
Received on Monday, 16 October 2000 04:45:31 UTC