"uid" microformats? (was Re: [uf-discuss] ISBN mark-up)

Xiaoming Liu liu_x at lanl.gov
Tue Apr 25 15:25:48 PDT 2006

On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Tantek Çelik wrote:

> ISO8601 is fairly well accepted.  The battle is over.  So we pick the
> current winner and go with it.
> Whereas, as you point out, the market for abstract ids, whether ISBN,
> pubmed, or whatever is still churning away, so we let it continue to churn.

I think it's a mistake to call these abstract ids are still churning away 
by market. They are well maintained by IANA [1] [2]

[1] http://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces
[2] http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.html

With URI you got all these things free, and you don't have to argue about 
persistentence or uniqueness (which are hollow without concrete 
schema/mechanism), it's much simpler to directly reference URI RFC.


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list