In message <[email protected]>, Karen Coyle <[email protected]> writes >Quoting Richard Light <[email protected]>:
>>> 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. In >fact, at some point we should start seeing ISTC (int'l std. text code) >IDs -- although they will fall somewhere between the Work and the >Edition (by OL's definition), so that may prompt the creation of the >Expression layer in OL. (Although I personally find the expression >entity to be problematically ambiguous.) My point was simply that dbpedia URLs will resolve to a machine-processible resource (if asked nicely), whereas Wikipedia ones won't. So for these resources to be useful in a Linked Data context, dbpedia URLs would be preferable. It would, however, certainly be useful for the OL framework to have one place for URLs which dereference to Linked Data resources, and another for those which simply point to web pages. Richard -- Richard Light _______________________________________________ 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]
