Your email client knew what do with:

info:doi/10.1111/j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x ?

doi:10.1111/j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x ?

Or did you recognize the info:doi scheme and Google it?

Or would this, in case of 99% of the world, just look like gibberish
or part of some nerd's PGP key?

-Ross.

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Karen Coyle <li...@kcoyle.net> wrote:
> Ross Singer wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Karen Coyle <li...@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But shouldn't we be able to know the difference between an identifier and
>>> a
>>> locator? Isn't that the problem here? That you don't know which it is if
>>> it
>>> starts with http://.
>>>
>>
>> But you do if it starts with http://dx.doi.org
>>
>
> No, *I* don't. And neither does my email program, since it displayed it as a
> URL (blue and underlined). That's inside knowledge, not part of the
> technology. Someone COULD create a web site at that address, and there's
> nothing in the URI itself to tell me if it's a URI or a URL.
>
> The general convention is that "http://"; is a web address, a location. I
> realize that it's also a form of URI, but that's a minority use of http.
> This leads to a great deal of confusion. I understand the desire to use
> domain names as a way to create unique, managed identifiers, but the http
> part is what is causing us problems.
>
> John Kunze's ARK system attempted to work around this by using http to
> retrieve information about the URI, so you're not just left guessing. It's
> not a question of resolution, but of giving you a short list of things that
> you can learn about a URI that begins with http. However, again, unless you
> know the secret you have no idea that those particular URI/Ls have that
> capability. So again we're going beyond the technology into some human
> knowledge that has to be there to take advantage of the capabilities. It
> doesn't seem so far fetched to make it possible for programs (dumb, dumb
> programs) to know the difference between an identifier and a location based
> on something universal, like a prefix, without having to be coded for dozens
> or hundreds of exceptions.
>
> kc
>
>> I still don't see the difference.  The same logic that would be
>> required to parse and understand the info: uri scheme could be used to
>> apply towards an http uri scheme.
>>
>> -Ross.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -----------------------------------
> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
> kco...@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
> ph.: 510-540-7596   skype: kcoylenet
> fx.: 510-848-3913
> mo.: 510-435-8234
> ------------------------------------
>

Reply via email to