[tdwg-tag] SourceForge LSID project websites broken - role for TDWG?
hlapp at duke.edu
Tue Apr 7 08:54:15 CEST 2009
On Apr 7, 2009, at 1:55 AM, Donald.Hobern at csiro.au wrote:
> Assume further that ANIC has a script on its servers which can
> return the RDF data for these specimens, say at http://www.csiro.au/anic/specimens/
> <catalogueNumber>. The registration process could result in the
> LSID urn:lsid:tdwg.org:csiro.anic:12345
Wouldn't that say according to your proposed usage guideline that
tdwg.org is whoGeneratedTheData and csiro.anic is
whatCollectionItBelongsTo, when in reality CSIRO generated the data
and ANIC is the collection it belongs to?
I understand why you're suggesting the LSID formatted as you do, and
you might say that the name-mangling isn't too drastic. But don't have
data owners a strong sense of ownership in their data objects and in
their collections? And more importantly, don't you think that a usage
guideline that contradicts itself (or that is bound to be internally
inconsistent) will continue to raise debate and be in the way of
> and the HTTP URI http://lsid.tdwg.org/urn:lsid:tdwg.org:csiro.anic:12345
> both being mapped through to http://www.csiro.au/anic/specimens/
Wouldn't http://purl.tdwg.org/CSIRO/ANIC/12345 be shorter, do more
justice to the names of whoGeneratedTheData and
whatCollectionItBelongsTo, be easier to implement, and have the same
possibilities to implement caching etc, in fact using standard
software such as mod_proxy for apache?
Just some thoughts.
: Hilmar Lapp -:- Durham, NC -:- hlapp at duke dot edu :
More information about the tdwg-tag