 |
 |
Owen, rft_id isn't really meant to be a unique identifier (although it can be in situations like a pmid or doi). are you looking for it to be? if so why? if professor A is pointing to http://www.bbc.co.uk and professor B is pointing to http://www.bbc.co.uk why do they have to have unique OpenURLs. Rosalyn On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Eric Hellman <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Nate's point is what I was thinking about in this comment in my original > reply: > If you don't add DC metadata, which seems like a good idea, you'll > definitely want to include something that will help you to persist your > replacement record. For example, a label or description for the link. > > I should also point out a solution that could work for some people but not > you- put rewrite rules in the gateways serving your network. A bit dangerous > and kludgy, but we've seen kludgier things. > > On Sep 14, 2009, at 4:24 PM, O.Stephens wrote: >> >> Nate has a point here - what if we end up with a commonly used URI >> pointing at a variety of different things over time, and so is used to >> indicate different content each time. However the problem with a 'short URL' >> solution (tr.im, purl etc), or indeed any locally assigned identifier that >> acts as a key, is that as described in the blog post you need prior >> knowledge of the short URL/identifier to use it. The only 'identifier' our >> authors know for a website is it's URL - and it seems contrary for us to ask >> them to use something else. I'll need to think about Nate's point - is this >> common or an edge case? Is there any other approach we could take? >> > > Eric Hellman > President, Gluejar, Inc. > 41 Watchung Plaza, #132 > Montclair, NJ 07042 > USA > > [log in to unmask] > http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/ >