Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

From: "Ross Singer" Except that OpenURL and SRU /already use different info URIs to describe the same things/. info:srw/schema/1/marcxml-v1.1 info:ofi/fmt:xml:xsd:MARC21 or info:srw/schema/1/onix-v2.0 info:ofi/fmt:xml:xsd:onix What is the rationale for this? None. (Or, whatever rational

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

So hey, I'm nobody wanted to see this thread revived, but I'm hoping you info uri folks can clear something up for me. So I'm trying to gather together a vocabulary of identifiers to unambiguously describe the format of the data you would be getting in a Jangle feed or an UnAPI response (or any ot

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Jonathan Rochkind writes: > There are trade-offs. I think a lot of that TAG stuff privileges > the theoretically pure over the on the ground practicalities. > They've got a great fantasy in their heads of what the semantic web > _could_ be, and I agree it's theoretically sound and _could_ be;

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Hiya, On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 01:10, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > It stands in the way of using them in the fully realized sem web vision. Ok, I'm puzzled. How? As the SemWeb vision is all about first-order logic over triplets, and the triplets are defined as URIs, if you can pop something into a

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Alexander Johannesen wrote: I think you are quite mistaken on this, but before we leap into wheter the web is suitable for SuDoc I'd rather point out that SuDoc isn't web friendly in itself, and *that* more than anything stands in the way of using them with the web. It stands in the way of usin

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 00:20, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > Can you show me where this definition of a "URL" vs. a "URI" is made in any > RFC or standard-like document? >From http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3986.html ; 1.1.3. URI, URL, and URN A URI can be further classified as a locator, a name

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of >>> Jonathan Rochkind >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:21 AM >>> To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU >>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: >>>

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) Over in: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/URNsAndRegistries-50-2006-08- 17.html They suggest: "URI opacity'Agents making use of URIs SHOULD NOT attempt to infer properties of the referenced resource.'" I

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Jonathan Rochkind > Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:21 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) > >

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Thanks Ray. By that definition ALL http URIs are URLs, a priori. I read Alexander as trying to make a different distinction. Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote: From: "Jonathan Rochkind" The difference between URIs and URLs? I don't believe that "URL" is something that exists any

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

W. Jonathan From: Code for Libraries [code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Alexander Johannesen [alexander.johanne...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 9:48 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 23:34, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > The difference between URIs and URLs?  I don't believe that "URL" is > something that exists any more in any standard, it's all URIs. Correct me if > I'm wrong. Sure it exists: URLs are a subset of URIs. URLs are locators as opposed to "

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

From: "Jonathan Rochkind" The difference between URIs and URLs? I don't believe that "URL" is something that exists any more in any standard, it's all URIs. The URL is alive and well. The W3C "definition", http://www.w3.org/TR/uri-clarification/ "a URL is a type of URI that identifies a re

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

.edu] On Behalf Of Alexander Johannesen [alexander.johanne...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 9:27 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) Hiya, Been meaning to jump into this discussion for a wh

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Hiya, Been meaning to jump into this discussion for a while, but I've been off to an alternative universe and I can't even say it's good to be back. :) Anwhoo ... On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 03:48, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote: > You're right, if there were a "web:"  URI scheme, the world

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

STSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) An account that has a depressing ring of accuracy to it. Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress writes: > You're right, if there were a "web:" URI scheme, the world woul

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

no, that's not at all what it implies. the ofi/name identifiers were minted as identifiers for namespaces of indentifiers, not as a wrapper scheme for the identifiers themselves. Yes, it's a bit TOO meta, but they can be safely ignored unless a new profile is desired. On Apr 5, 2009, at 10

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Karen Coyle wrote: The ones that really puzzle me, however, are the OpenURL info namespace URIs for ftp, http, https and info. This implies that EVERY identifier used by OpenURL needs an info URI, even if it is a URI in its own right. They are under "info:ofi/nam" which is called "Namespa

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Jonathan Rochkind wrote: URI for an ISBN or SuDocs? I don't think the GPO is going anywhere, but the GPO isn't committing to supporting an http URI scheme, and whoever is, who knows if they're going anywhere. That issue is certainly mitigated by Ross using purl.org for these, instead of his

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

At Thu, 2 Apr 2009 19:29:49 +0100, Rob Sanderson wrote: > All I meant by that was that the info:doi/ URI is more informative as to > what the identifier actually is than just the doi by itself, which could > be any string. Equally, if I saw an SRW info URI like: > > info:srw/cql-context-set/2/rel

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > Note this isn't as much of a problem for "born web" resources -- nobody's > going to accidentally create an alternate URI for a dbpedia term, because > anybody that knows about dbpedia knows that it lives at dbpedia. Unless they use the

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Rob Sanderson wrote: info URIs, In My Opinion, are ideally suited for long term identifiers of non information resources. But http URIs are definitely better than something which isn't a URI at all. Through this discussion I am clarifying my thoughts on this too. I feel that info URIs are

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Hi Ray - At Thu, 2 Apr 2009 13:48:19 -0400, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote: > > You're right, if there were a "web:" URI scheme, the world would be a > better place. But it's not, and the world is worse off for it. Well, the original concept of the ‘web’ was, as I understand it, to

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 18:11 +0100, Erik Hetzner wrote: > At Thu, 2 Apr 2009 13:47:50 +0100, > Mike Taylor wrote: > > > > Erik Hetzner writes: > > > Without external knowledge that info:doi/10./xxx is a URI, I can > > > only guess. > > > > Yes, that is true. The point is that by specifying

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

; > Instead, they should have bit the bullet and coined a new scheme. They > didn't, and that's why we're in the mess we're in. > > --Ray > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "Houghton,Andrew" > To: > Sent:

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

nt: Thursday, April 02, 2009 9:41 AM Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:26 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU S

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

At Thu, 2 Apr 2009 13:47:50 +0100, Mike Taylor wrote: > > Erik Hetzner writes: > > Without external knowledge that info:doi/10./xxx is a URI, I can > > only guess. > > Yes, that is true. The point is that by specifying that the rft_id > has to be a URI, you can then use other kinds of URI

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Houghton,Andrew writes: > > > RFC 3986 (URI generic syntax) says that "http:" is a URI scheme > > > not a protocol. Just because it says "http" people make all > > > kinds of assumptions about type of use, persistence, > > > resolvability, etc. > > > > And RFC 2616 (Hypertext transfer proto

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Uh, before this gets completely out of hand, UC is still running a PURL server, see for example: Roy On 4/2/09 4/2/09 € 8:07 AM, "Mike Taylor" wrote: > Karen Coyle writes: >>> OK, good, then if you are concerned

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Mike Taylor wrote: Wait, what? They _were_ running a PURL resolver, but now they're not? What does the P in PURL stand for again? Which, Mike, is why I'd rather have a single point of failure at purl.org, an organization which understands it's persistence mission and is likely to be suppo

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Karen Coyle writes: > > OK, good, then if you are concerned about the PURL services SPOF, > > take the freely available PURL software and created a distributed > > PURL based system and put it up for the community. I think > > several people have looked at this, but I have not heard of any >

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Karen Coyle > Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:15 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) > &g

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Houghton,Andrew wrote: OK, good, then if you are concerned about the PURL services SPOF, take the freely available PURL software and created a distributed PURL based system and put it up for the community. I think several people have looked at this, but I have not heard of any progress or im

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Houghton,Andrew writes: > > > > I have to say I am suspicious of schemes like PURL, which > > > > for all their good points introduce a single point of > > > > failure into, well, everything that uses them. That can't > > > > be good. Especially as it's run by the same compary that > >

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Houghton,Andrew wrote: RFC 3986 (URI generic syntax) says that "http:" is a URI scheme not a protocol. Just because it says "http" people make all kinds of assumptions about type of use, persistence, resolvability, etc. And RFC 2616 (Hypertext transfer protocol) says: "The HTTP protocol is

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Mike Taylor > Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:07 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) > >

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Houghton,Andrew writes: > > I have to say I am suspicious of schemes like PURL, which for all > > their good points introduce a single point of failure into, well, > > everything that uses them. That can't be good. Especially as > > it's run by the same compary that also runs the often-unavai

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Mike Taylor > Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 8:41 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) > > I hav

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Karen Coyle > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:26 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) > >

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Erik Hetzner writes: > > Not quite. Embedding a DOI in an info URI (or a URN) means that > > the identifier describes its own type. If you just get the naked > > string > >10./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x > > passed to you, say as an rft_id in an OpenURL, then you can't > > tell (except

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:38 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering in

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Ross Singer writes: > Ray, you are absolutely right. These would be bad identifiers. But > let's say they're all identical (which I think is what you're saying, > right?), then this just strengthens the case for indirection through a > service like purl.org. Then it doesn't *matter* that all

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 1:59 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering info:

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

This really puzzles me, because I thought http referred to a protocol: hypertext transfer protocol. And when you put "http://"; in front of something you are indicating that you are sending the following string along to be processed by that protocol. It implies a certain application over the we

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) Ray, you are absolutely right. These would be bad identifiers. But let's say they're all identical (which I think is what you're saying, right?),

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

From: "Houghton,Andrew" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 1:21 PM > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] > registering info: uris?) > > >>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of >>&g

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

At Wed, 1 Apr 2009 14:34:45 +0100, Mike Taylor wrote: > Not quite. Embedding a DOI in an info URI (or a URN) means that the > identifier describes its own type. If you just get the naked string > 10./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x > passed to you, say as an rft_id in an OpenURL, then you can'

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

ion and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 1:06 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registe

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

An LCCN is useful because I can use it to look up records in _multiple_ different databases. I suppose that you will argue this is a form of "de-referencing", but it is not a canonical de-referencing, because I want and need to do it in multiple places. It is also not a de-referencing that can

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

My point is that I don't see how they're different in practice. And one of them actually allowed you to do something from your email client. -Ross. On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: > Ross, I don't get your point. My point was about the confusion between two > things that begin

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote: > Even more to the point: there is no sound definition of "dereference".  To > dereference a resource means to retrieve a representation of it. There has > never been any agreement within the w3c of what constitutes a > rep

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Karen Coyle > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 1:06 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) > > T

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > I completely disagree.  There are all sorts of useful identifiers I use in > my work every day that can not be automatically dereferenced. How are they useful to you? I'm seriously just asking for examples here, not trying to start an ar

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Ross, I don't get your point. My point was about the confusion between two things that begin: http:// but that are very different in practice. What's yours? kc Ross Singer wrote: Your email client knew what do with: info:doi/10./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x ? doi:10./j.1475-4983.2007.00

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Your email client knew what do with: info:doi/10./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x ? doi:10./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, A

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Ross Singer wrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Karen Coyle 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.do

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

From: "Jonathan Rochkind" There are all sorts of useful identifiers I use in my work every day that can not be automatically dereferenced. Even more to the point: there is no sound definition of "dereference". To dereference a resource means to retrieve a representation of it. There has ne

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Karen Coyle 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 I still don't see

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

f Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:58 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?) I realize this is pretty much a dead-end debate as everyone has dug themselves into a position and

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

I completely disagree. There are all sorts of useful identifiers I use in my work every day that can not be automatically dereferenced. Jonathan Ed Summers wrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: It wouldn't be good for much if you couldn't dereference it at all.

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: > It wouldn't be good for much if you couldn't dereference it at all. I totally agree. //Ed

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:58 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: > [CODE4LIB] registering i

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

...@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./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x One of them is http

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Mike Taylor > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:17 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris? > > Houghton,Andrew writes: > > Again we have moved t

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

From: "Houghton,Andrew" The point being that: urn:doi:* info:doi:* provide no advantages over: http://doi.org/* I think they do. I realize this is pretty much a dead-end debate as everyone has dug themselves into a position and nobody is going to change their mind. It is a philosophica

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > I admit that "httprange-14" still confuses me. (I have no idea why it's > called "httprange-14" for one thing). http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/14 Some background: http://efoundations.typepad.com/efoundations/2009/02/httpr

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

w all of the possible templates (with more being created all the time)? Jonathan Houghton,Andrew wrote: From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:08 AM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: [CODE4LIB] resolution and

Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Jonathan Rochkind > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:08 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] > registering info: uris?) > &g

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

: 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./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x One of them is http://doi.wiley.com/10./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x Another is run by crossref; Some OpenURL ink

[CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)

Houghton,Andrew wrote: Lets separate your argument into two pieces. Identification and resolution. The DOI is the identifier and it inherently doesn't tie itself to any resolution mechanism. So creating an info URI for it is meaningless, it's just another alias for the DOI. I can create an HT

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

v.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./j.1475

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Houghton,Andrew writes: > > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > > Mike Taylor > > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:35 AM > > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris? > > &g

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Houghton,Andrew writes: > > 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? > > >

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

ellman > 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./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x > One of them is http://d

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

> 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 lik

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Mike Taylor > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:35 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris? > > Houghton,Andrew writes: > > So creating an info URI

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

I'll bite. There are actually a number of http URLs that work like http://dx.doi.org/10./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x One of them is http://doi.wiley.com/10./j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x Another is run by crossref; Some OpenURL ink servers also have doi proxy capability. So for code to extrac

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 14:28 +0100, Houghton,Andrew wrote: > The DOI is the identifier and it inherently doesn't > tie itself to any resolution mechanism. So creating an info URI > for it is meaningless, it's just another alias for the DOI. I > can create an HTTP resolution mechanism for DOI's b

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Houghton,Andrew writes: > > The point is that (I argue) the identifier shouldn't tie itself > > to a particular dereferencing mechanism (such as dx.doi.org, or > > amazon.com) but should be dereferenced by software that knows > > what's the most appropriate dereferencing mechanism _for you_ in

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Mike Taylor > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:17 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris? > > The point is that (I argue) the identifier shouldn't ti

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 14:17 +0100, Mike Taylor wrote: > Ed Summers writes: > > Assuming a world where you cannot de-reference this DOI what is it > > good for? > > It wouldn't be good for much if you couldn't dereference it at all. > The point is that (I argue) the identifier shouldn't tie itsel

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Ed Summers writes: > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:14 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: > > As usual, an ounce of example is worth a ton of exposition, so: > > > > Suppose I always keep a PDF of my latest paper at > >http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/latest.pdf > > for the benefit of people who want to k

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Mike Taylor > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 8:38 AM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris? > > Ross Singer writes: > > I suppose my point i

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: > Worse, consider how the actionable-identifier approach would translate > to other non-actionable identifiers like ISBNs.  If I offer the > non-actionable identifier >        info:isbn/025490 > which identified Farlow and Brett-Surman's edite

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:14 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: > As usual, an ounce of example is worth a ton of exposition, so: > > Suppose I always keep a PDF of my latest paper at >        http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/latest.pdf > for the benefit of people who want to keep an eye on my research. > (Hey, it

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Ross Singer writes: > I suppose my point is, there's a valid case for identifiers like > your doi, I think we can agree on that (well, we don't have to > agree, these identifiers will exist and continue to exist long > after we've grown tired of flashing out gang signs). What I don't > unders

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:14 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: > will find at that location.  Two different days, two different papers. > Note that a single location (latest.pdf) contains at different times > two different Things.  And note that a single Thing (the older of the Ok, Mike, thanks for getting

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Ross Singer writes: > > Identifiers identify; locations locate. > > I've been avoiding and ignoring this all day, because I wanted the > thread to die and we all move on with our lives. But Kevin Clarke > just quoted this on Twitter, and I felt I couldn't let this slide > by. > > Locatio

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Mike Taylor wrote: > Identifiers identify; locations locate. I've been avoiding and ignoring this all day, because I wanted the thread to die and we all move on with our lives. But Kevin Clarke just quoted this on Twitter, and I felt I couldn't let this slide by.

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Houghton,Andrew writes: > > The problem is that, after setting up a non-dereferencable http: > > URI to name something like an XML namespace or a CQL context set, > > it's just so darned _tempting_ to put something explanatory at > > the location which happens to be indicated by that URI :-) >

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

At Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:52:10 -0400, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > > Erik Hetzner wrote: > > > > I don’t actually think that there is anybody who is arguing that all > > identifiers must be resolvable. There are people who argue that there > > are identifiers which must NOT be resolvable; at least in

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 16:09, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > There are obviously other uses for URIs than sticking them in an 'href' > attribute of an . Like, the uses I thought this conversation was about? > > What are we talking about again? EMACS RULES VI DROOLS -Mike

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

n Rochkind Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 3:52 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris? But when did someone suggest that all identifiers must be resolvable? When Andrew argued that: Having unresolvable URIs is anti-Web since the Web is a hypertext system w

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of > Jonathan Rochkind > Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 3:52 PM > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris? > > But when did someone suggest that all identifiers must

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

Erik Hetzner wrote: I don’t actually think that there is anybody who is arguing that all identifiers must be resolvable. There are people who argue that there are identifiers which must NOT be resolvable; at least in their basic form. (see Stuart Weibel [1]). There are indeed people arguing

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

From: "Hilmar Lapp" Nor do people outside of libraries care about identifiers. You might be surprised: http://www.lsrn.org/ yes, I overstated, let me rephrase. There are communities who are interested in specific object classes and want identifier schemes for them. For libraries there are

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

At Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:58:04 -0400, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > > It's interesting that there are at least three, if not four, viewpoints > being represented in this conversation. > > The first argument is over whether all identifiers should be resolvable > or not. While I respect the argument

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

On Mar 30, 2009, at 11:18 AM, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote: From: "Ross Singer" nobody gives a damn about info:uris outside of libraries, Nor do people outside of libraries care about identifiers. You might be surprised: http://www.lsrn.org/ -hilmar --

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

le at the present time to provide http resolution for these identifiers. Jonathan Houghton,Andrew wrote: From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 12:16 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] registeri

Re: [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?

I agree with this as well. I guess it just depends on whether you think this needs to be done prior to facitating the process to mint URIs or after. The advantage to the former is that it will actually get documented. Speaking of, if anybody wants to help formalize this for the purl method, I'll

  1   2   >