Hello Henry,
>I too would be interested in understanding why people in the life
>sciences don't use URLs
The short answer is that I believe people in Life Sciences do use URLs for URIs whenever they are appropriate. We certainly do. However these posts I wrote in the last couple of weeks detail some of the problems with using URLs to name digital objects which is what we use LSIDs for.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-semweb-lifesci/2006Jun/0210.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-semweb-lifesci/2006Jul/0032.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-semweb-lifesci/2006Jul/0074.html
Kindest regards, Sean
| Henry Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/24/2006 06:45 AM |
|
I too would be interested in understanding why people in the life
sciences don't use URLs, because I think the advantage of using them
is absolutely huge. Being able to "GET my meaning" [1] makes the
Semantic web so easy to explain, so simple to read, so beautiful all
in all that one really needs to have an amazing reason not to go that
way.
Henry
[1] http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/bblfish?entry=get_my_meaning
Home page: http://bblfish.net/
Sun Blog: http://blogs.sun.com/bblfish/
On 20 Jul 2006, at 12:57, Sean Martin wrote:
> hi Susie,
> Is there any chance that we can have a section that details the
> pro's and con's of URL's as URIs in a Life Sciences setting. It is
> my understanding that the LSID URN was created in response to
> certain short comings of URLs as names - but may well not have
> over come them and so the various concerns may not be obvious with
> just the one table suggested.
>
> Kindest regards, Sean
