This lurker gives it a +1.
Edward M. Corrado wrote:
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.
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?
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?
There are actually a number of http URLs that work like
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
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.
Library Information Systems Specialist
University of Northern Iowa
Cedar Falls, IA 50613