Ross Singer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> But shouldn't we be able to know the difference between an identifier and a
>> locator? Isn't that the problem here? That you don't know which it is if it
>> starts with http://.
> But you do if it starts with http://dx.doi.org
No, *I* don't. And neither does my email program, since it displayed it
as a URL (blue and underlined). That's inside knowledge, not part of the
technology. Someone COULD create a web site at that address, and there's
nothing in the URI itself to tell me if it's a URI or a URL.
The general convention is that "http://" is a web address, a location. I
realize that it's also a form of URI, but that's a minority use of http.
This leads to a great deal of confusion. I understand the desire to use
domain names as a way to create unique, managed identifiers, but the
http part is what is causing us problems.
John Kunze's ARK system attempted to work around this by using http to
retrieve information about the URI, so you're not just left guessing.
It's not a question of resolution, but of giving you a short list of
things that you can learn about a URI that begins with http. However,
again, unless you know the secret you have no idea that those particular
URI/Ls have that capability. So again we're going beyond the technology
into some human knowledge that has to be there to take advantage of the
capabilities. It doesn't seem so far fetched to make it possible for
programs (dumb, dumb programs) to know the difference between an
identifier and a location based on something universal, like a prefix,
without having to be coded for dozens or hundreds of exceptions.
> I still don't see the difference. The same logic that would be
> required to parse and understand the info: uri scheme could be used to
> apply towards an http uri scheme.
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
[log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet