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

On Aug 22, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Bijan Parsia wrote: Following Matthias's suggestion, I started adding them to this page: (At the bottom under issues.) Would you prefer they migrated to the recommendations page (which is where, IIRC, Alan s

Re: making statements on the semantic web

Hi, About the identifier, the essential and shorter way to identify the entity you propose is uniprot:p26838 , but contrary to http://bio2rdf.org/uniprot:P26838, http://beta.uniprot.org/uniprot/P26838.rdf and urn:lsid:uniprot.org:uniprot:P26838 (if you have a lsid resolver), this does not resol

RE: identifier to use

> From: Phillip Lord > [ . . . ] > I don't understand the desire to implement everything using > HTTP. Why call lots of things, which are actually several > protocols by a name which suggests that they are all one. How > to distinguish between an HTTP URI which allows you to do > location independ

Re: identifier to use

Phillip Lord wrote: I don't understand the desire to implement everything using HTTP. Likewise, I don't understand the desire to implement everything using anything but HTTP :-) If there is an existing system that is (incredibly) widely adopted and that can be built upon, surely that's the w

Re: identifier to use

Bijan Parsia wrote: [...] the turning of the screw is slower [...] Well that's great comfort :-)

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar Lapp wrote: Yeah, because they are URLs. But don't almost all of the databases you have listed there use identifiers (accession numbers, etc) for identifying their objects? I wish :-) Some databases are just a bunch of static web pages, and many like to use something nice like gene n

Re: identifier to use

On Aug 23, 2007, at 11:18 AM, Eric Jain wrote: Almost no database, data center, or publisher uses HTTP URIs for identifying their digital objects, and stable HTTP URIs at present aren't adopted or the common denominator for identifying digital objects in the life science domain either.

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar Lapp wrote: I'm not sure what you mean by "closed archive." If the UniProt consortium decided to set up an archive for all their data, that's what I mean by "closed". Obviously much easier than getting the entire life sciences community to agree on implementing one scheme :-) Almos

Re: identifier to use

> "BP" == Bijan Parsia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: BP> On 23 Aug 2007, at 14:12, Phillip Lord wrote: >> >> If you loose a trademark BP> Trademark *suit*. I.e., you are infringing on someone else's trademark. >> and have to stop using identifiers with a "uniprot" in them, then any

Re: identifier to use

On 23 Aug 2007, at 14:12, Phillip Lord wrote: "EJ" == Eric Jain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [snip] EJ> Note that any other name-based registration system could run into EJ> trouble, too: Let's say UniProt lost a trademark suite and was forced to EJ> change its name to something else,

Re: identifier to use

> "EJ" == Eric Jain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: EJ> Do you mean fail over at run time, so when an identifier can't be EJ> resolved, the resolver retries with a backup service? Hilmar described the mechanism in his last email. Again, perhaps I am wrong. EJ> In general, my feeling is t

Re: identifier to use

On Aug 23, 2007, at 9:58 AM, Eric Jain wrote: Digital archives will use opaque identifier systems that aren't HTTP URIs whether the W3C likes it or not - they look at time horizons beyond our lifetimes, when HTTP may not even exist anymore. The need for GUIDs existed before HTTP URIs and

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar Lapp wrote: Digital archives will use opaque identifier systems that aren't HTTP URIs whether the W3C likes it or not - they look at time horizons beyond our lifetimes, when HTTP may not even exist anymore. The need for GUIDs existed before HTTP URIs and will continue to exist afterward

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar Lapp wrote: That said, I'm thinking that maybe that doesn't need to have any bearing on how resources are identified on the semantic web. This is the point. Many identifiers, like ISBN, SSN, Passport Number, license plate doesn't have any bearing on the web. So, it doesn't have to use

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar Lapp wrote: You don't mind that the others on the list are as lazy? There are entire papers about this topic in information science journals, and I'm not sure we want to repeat these here (read: I'm lazy and don't want to repeat these here ...). If I was familiar with one of these sys

Re: identifier to use

On Aug 23, 2007, at 8:19 AM, Eric Jain wrote: As far as I can see, LSIDs are basically location independent. The only whole I can see is if someone else buys uniprot.org, sets up an LSID resolution service and then returns crap. purls have the same issue I think. Yes, I guess that's a pr

Re: identifier to use

Phillip Lord wrote: As I understand it, there is a fail over mechanism. If uniprot.org falls over, the first resolution step can be performed by an LSID server not at uniprot.org. I can't remember exactly how this works, as I haven't read the spec for ages. As far as I can see, LSIDs are basi

Re: identifier to use

On Aug 23, 2007, at 8:21 AM, Eric Jain wrote: Phillip Lord wrote: Eric, trying putting "digital preservation" into google. There many projects out there working in this area. I know, but I'm not very familiar with any of these projects, and, being lazy, hoped that someone who follows th

Re: identifier to use

Phillip Lord wrote: Eric, trying putting "digital preservation" into google. There many projects out there working in this area. I know, but I'm not very familiar with any of these projects, and, being lazy, hoped that someone who follows this list might be and could comment.

Re: identifier to use

Phillip Lord wrote: As I understand it, there is a fail over mechanism. If uniprot.org falls over, the first resolution step can be performed by an LSID server not at uniprot.org. I can't remember exactly how this works, as I haven't read the spec for ages. Do you mean fail over at run time,

Re: identifier to use

> "EJ" == Eric Jain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> These archives will all need to use opaque identifiers to track >> relationships, provenance, versions, and other metadata. EJ> The only digital archive project I'm vaguely familiar with is the EJ> Internet Archive project, and that

Re: identifier to use

> "EJ" == Eric Jain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: EJ> 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. EJ> You're right, that

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar Lapp wrote: In the LSID resolver spec resolution doesn't depend on the authority domain name. Neither does the HTTP URI scheme: You can set up common HTTP proxy software to reroute HTTP requests (if you don't want to do application-level rewriting). I don't quite see how that's less e

Re: identifier to use

Hilmar Lapp wrote: I just don't understand the relevance the current usage stats of DOIs in UniProt queries should have for how and in which ways they may be used in the Semantic Web in 3 years from now. I understood that the apparent success of the DOI system was being used as an argument t