I disagree. Keep this going. A delete key is in easy reach and if you have a mail reader that does threading you can easily ignore the thread. I have been finding this discussion rather educational.
Edward On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Glen Newton - NRC/CNRC CISTI/ICIST Research <glen.new...@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote: > I count 75 messages on this topic. Perhaps it is time to take this off > list? Someone give us a summary when/if this is resolved? Or start a > new list for this issue and tell us where it is? > > thanks, > > Glen > >> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of >> Eric Hellman >> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:51 AM >> To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU >> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris? >> >> There are actually a number of http URLs that work like >> http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x >> One of them is http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x >> Another is run by crossref; Some OpenURL ink servers also have doi >> proxy capability. >> So for code to extract the doi reliably from http urls, the code needs >> to know all the possibilities for the doi proxy stem. The proxies also >> tend to have optional parameters that can control the resolution. In >> principle, the info:doi/ stem addresses this. > > Again we have moved the discussion to a specific resolution mechanism, > e.g., OpenURL. OpenURL could have been defined differently, such > that rft_id and rft_idScheme were available and you used the actual > DOI value and specified the scheme of the identifier. Then the issue > of extraction of the identifier value from the URI goes away, because > there is no URI needed. > > > Andy. >