I think using locally meaningful ids in rft_id is a misuse and a  
mistake. locally meaningful data should goi in rft_dat, accompanied by  
rfr_id

just sayin'

On Sep 15, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:

> I do like Ross's solution, if you really wanna use OpenURL. I'm much  
> more comfortable with the idea of including a URI based on your own  
> local service in rft_id, then including any old public URL in rft_id.
>
> Then at least your link resolver can say "if what's in rft_id begins  
> with (eg)  http://telstar.open.ac.uk/, THEN I know this is one of  
> these purl type things, and I know that sending the user to it will  
> result in a redirect to an end-user-appropriate access URL."
> Cause that's my concern with putting random URLs in rft_id, that  
> there's no way to know if they are intended as end-user-appropriate  
> access URLs or not, and in putting things in rft_id that aren't  
> really good "identifiers" for the referent at all.   But using your  
> own local service ID, now you really DO have something that's  
> appropriately considered a "persistent identifier" for the referent,  
> AND you have a straightforward way to tell when the rft_id of this  
> context is intended as an access URL.
>
> Jonathan
>

Eric Hellman
President, Gluejar, Inc.
41 Watchung Plaza, #132
Montclair, NJ 07042
USA

[log in to unmask]
http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/