On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Karen Coyle <[email protected]> wrote: > Quoting Richard Light <[email protected]>: > >> In message >> <[email protected]>, Frankie >> Roberto <[email protected]> writes >> >>> I see a "links" tab on the Work edit page that lets you add links with >>> a URL and a display string. Is that what you need? >>> >>> Not quite - a URL isn't always the same as an identifier (eg a LibraryThing >>> id). I've used this to add a few Wikipedia URLs though. >> >> Yes, ideally we would also want a place to add the corresponding dbpedia >> identifiers. > > Wouldn't many of these identifiers be resolvable URIs? Although I, > too, am reluctant to mix identifiers and locators, it seems to be > inevitable since so many are both (wikipedia page URLs/URIs and OL > URLs/URIs for example). But you are right, there are many identifiers > that aren't in an http resolvable format (ISBN notably, also OCLC > number, although these are not at the work level), so it does make > sense in the meanwhile to have an ID field available for Works.
For URIs/URLs which consist of a core identifier wrapped with some type of boilerplate (ie most of them), storing the identifier and template separately makes it easy make a single change to the template and have it affect all formatted output URLs. It also allows you to easily reuse an identifier in a different context (e.g. a Wikipedia article id in a DBpedia URI). Allowing users to store undifferentiated URLs is easier up front, but makes the data less useful in the long run, I think. Tom _______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
