Task 9: LSID Resolver Namespaces (or should it be Authority Identifications)
Kevin Richards
RichardsK at LANDCARERESEARCH.CO.NZ
Mon Feb 27 08:56:10 CET 2006
I believe this topic should cover both LSID namespaces and authority
names. These are very related topics and the best practices for one
greatly influences the best practices for the other, ie if you decide
that it is best that authority names use sub-domains to a specific
level, eg names.indexfungorum.org (not the best example I know but it
illustrates the point), then less namespacing is required for the
"namespace" part of the LSID. (All this assumes opacity - I see it as
just "reccommendations" on how to divide your namespacing over the
authority name and namespace parts of the LSID).
Kevin
>>> ricardo at TDWG.ORG 25/02/2006 6:11 a.m. >>>
Donald Hobern wrote:
> *_9. LSID Resolver Namespaces_**
>
(http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php?wakka=LSIDResolverNamespaces)
*
>
>
>
> This is a starting-point for discussion of best practices in using
DNS
> entries for LSID resolution services.
>
Donald, I believe that the definition of this task and its name do
not match. I think it is a terminology problem. The part of the LSID
that is related to DNS is the *authority identification*. The
*namespace* isn't related to DNS. here's the LSID syntax to
illustrate:
urn:lsid:authority_identification:namespace:identifier:revision.
So, this group will discuss authority ids or namespaces (or both)?
Which should we fix, the page name or the description?
I think I have already mixed this up in a previous post to Kevin
Richards. Sorry about that.
Regards,
Ricardo
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
WARNING: This email and any attachments may be confidential and/or
privileged. They are intended for the addressee only and are not to be read,
used, copied or disseminated by anyone receiving them in error. If you are
not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by return email and
delete this message and any attachments.
The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and do not
necessarily reflect the official views of Landcare Research.
Landcare Research
http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--=__PartE3C6A8CA.0__=
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: HTML
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1522" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV>I believe this topic should cover both LSID namespaces and =
authority names. These are very related topics and the best =
practices for one greatly influences the best practices for the other, ie =
if you decide that it is best that authority names use sub-domains to =
a specific level, eg names.indexfungorum.org (not the best example I know =
but it illustrates the point), then less namespacing is required for the =
"namespace" part of the LSID. (All this assumes opacity - I see it =
as just "reccommendations" on how to divide your namespacing over the =
authority name and namespace parts of the LSID).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin<BR><BR>>>> ricardo at TDWG.ORG 25/02/2006 6:11 a.m. =
>>><BR></DIV>
<DIV style=3D"COLOR: #000000">Donald Hobern wrote:<BR><BR>> *_9. LSID =
Resolver Namespaces_**<BR>> (<A href=3D"http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wi=
kka.php?wakka=3DLSIDResolverNamespaces)">http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikk=
a.php?wakka=3DLSIDResolverNamespaces)</A> *<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>=
This is a starting-point for discussion of best practices in using =
DNS<BR>> entries for LSID resolution services.<BR>><BR> &n=
bsp; Donald, I believe that the definition of this task and its name =
do<BR>not match. I think it is a terminology problem. The part of the =
LSID<BR>that is related to DNS is the *authority identification*. =
The<BR>*namespace* isn't related to DNS. here's the LSID syntax to =
illustrate:<BR>urn:lsid:authority_identification:namespace:identifier:revis=
ion.<BR><BR> So, this group will discuss authority ids =
or namespaces (or both)?<BR>Which should we fix, the page name or the =
description?<BR><BR> I think I have already mixed this =
up in a previous post to Kevin<BR>Richards. Sorry about that.<BR><BR> =
Regards,<BR><BR>Ricardo<BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>
WARNING: This email and any attachments may be confidential and/or<BR>
privileged. They are intended for the addressee only and are not to be read,<BR>
used, copied or disseminated by anyone receiving them in error. If you are<BR>
not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by return email and<BR>
delete this message and any attachments.<BR>
<BR>
The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and do not<BR>
necessarily reflect the official views of Landcare Research. <BR>
<BR>
Landcare Research<BR>
http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz<BR>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>
<BR>
</BODY></HTML>
More information about the tdwg-tag
mailing list