richardsk at LANDCARERESEARCH.CO.NZ
Mon Mar 20 20:51:40 CET 2006
I have added a few thoughts to the LSID namespaces wiki at http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php?wakka=LSIDResolverNamespaces
My thoughts in summary:
1. The LSID authority name should be controlled by the institution that "owns" the data being represented by the LSID
2. The authority part of the LSID should be to institution level or a project within that institution if the institution is large, conatins many projects or it is more practical to do so. See the LSID best practices guide at http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/os-lsidbp/*
3. The authority name will most likely be the Internet domain name of the institution/project, or a subdomain of that. However it would be better to use generic project names (such as IPNI.org) to aid persistence - ie the authority name will not forever refer to an institution that may no longer exist.
4. The namespace part of the LSID should be kept generic enough to cover the entire subject scope of the LSID data, eg "Fungi/Names", and not specific namespaces such as "Fungi/TCS"
5. External parties requiring to use/assign LSIDs that are maintined by another institute should use the FAN (foreign authority notification) mechanism built into the LSID framework, wherever possible. In cases where this is not practical, it would be best for the external party to request the assignment of LSIDs through the "owner" of the LSID authority.
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.
More information about the tdwg-tag