Re: Does follow-your-nose apply in the enterprise? was: RDF for molecules, using InChI

On Aug 22, 2007, at 2:50 AM, Jonathan Rees wrote: Sure - to list alternatives with costs and benefits is just what I've proposed to do in order to civilize these debates, and as a waypoint toward drafting the fabled 'recommendations' report. I'm sorry I've been inactive on the list but oth

Postdoctoral position - Semantic eInfrastructure for Social Sciences (Deadline: Aug 24, 2007)

Apologies for cross-posting! == Postdoctoral Research Fellow Semantic eInfrastructure for Social Sciences Computing Science University of Aberdeen The PolicyGrid project within the Department of Computing Science invites applications for the above post, to work on a new eInfrastructure activ

Re: Does follow-your-nose apply in the enterprise? was: RDF for molecules, using InChI

Sure - to list alternatives with costs and benefits is just what I've proposed to do in order to civilize these debates, and as a waypoint toward drafting the fabled 'recommendations' report. I'm sorry I've been inactive on the list but other matters have been pressing. I have been trying t

URN namespace ids

On Aug 21, 2007, at 12:11 PM, Eric Jain wrote: That's not accidental reuse as cold happen with e.g. urn:bm:ipi:12 where someone who has never heard of Banff might end up with the same identifier for something completely unrelated (e.g. hotels in the Bahamas). There is a registry of URN n

Re: identifier to use

On Aug 22, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Eric Jain wrote: Note: While most publishers seem to have adopted the DOI system, I don't see many people using it (e.g. in queries) on our site. But if someone who works for a publisher is lurking, they might have better usage stats! I'm don't want to come

RE: identifier to use

> From: Hilmar Lapp > [ . . . ] > In the LSID resolver spec resolution doesn't depend on the authority > domain name. Just so you're aware, the *exact* same thing can be achieved with HTTP URIs, as described here: http://dbooth.org/2006/urn2http/ For example, given the URI > http://entrez.exam

Re: identifier to use

On Aug 22, 2007, at 1:37 PM, Eric Jain wrote: If I have an LSID like urn:lsid:uniprot.org:uniprot:P12345 and uniprot.org disappears (assuming there was even a resolver running there in the first place), how is that URI going to be more useful than a simple HTTP URL In the LSID resolver

Re: identifier to use

Phillip Lord wrote: Actually, LSIDs are domain specific, or rather they were designed to support the needs of the Life Sciences; this is not to say that different domains do not have the same needs. You're right, that's a better way to put it! Look at DOIs and LSIDs. They are different, th

Re: identifier to use

> "EJ" == Eric Jain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: EJ> I guess that could happen... Do you have some examples of EJ> domain-specific standards that became de-facto standards, supported by EJ> generic tools etc? The web leaps to mind. Remember that? >> As for being limited to a domain

Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Charter Questionnaire

Hi guys, I sent a pointer to the HCLS questionnaire to public-new-work-comments [[ The Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences charter ends at the end of December and there is now even more enthusiasm for work in this area. The questionnaire http://www.w3.org/2007/06/HCLSForm will help us dec

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar Lapp wrote: Right. That was one of the problems that was faced when the I3C consortium started (namely multiple identifier systems with idiosyncratic translation rules to convert to a resolvable URL), and which it tries to address by unifying the identifier and resolution schemes. Gr

Some research on generic tool behavior

On 21 Aug 2007, at 17:11, Eric Jain wrote: [snip] Here are two typical applications that I know people have been playing with (and that don't work quite as well if URI's are non- HTTP or unresolvable): 1. Piggy Bank , a semantic web browser and data

Re: Fleshed out "HTTP URIs are not Without Expense"

On 22 Aug 2007, at 00:58, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: Since this dialog is playing out on several fronts and I would like the dissenting view well-articulated, I've taken the liberty to flesh out the (previously empty) "HTTP URIs are not Without Expense" Wiki (http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/HCLS_URI_m

Re: Signs modulo resolution was - Re: Does follow-your-nose apply in the enterprise?

Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: A distinct name would be nice when you consider that my first reaction was to go with the AWWW/httprange-14-friendly term 'non-information source'. However, the combination of the fact the httprange-14 finding is being rewritten [1] (yes!) and Roy Fielding's response [2]

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar, It seems to me that domain-specific resolution systems are rather a fact and we deal with them all the time. This is what we try to avoid. The reasoning should not be: Oh, we should use it because it is already there. The reasoning should be: would it be better if we do it in another