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

[Tantek Ç elik]

First of all, Welcome Xiaoming Liu!

On 4/25/06 8:19 AM, "Xiaoming Liu" <liu_x at lanl.gov> wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Ryan King wrote:
> 
>> 
>> URLs, if used propertly can be sufficient for "globalby unique
>> identifier[s]." Sure, you can mess things up by using a non-routeable address
>> or scheme, but its pretty easy to get it right, too.
> 
> 
> URLs may apply to many cases but not necessarily all.
> 
> -- some identifiers are not resolvable by default, such as UUID

We are deliberately preferring identifiers that are resolvable.  This is by
design.


> -- many identifiers have well-established convention by URI/URN registry,
> such as urn:isbn or tel:, in these cases I don't think it's a good
> practice to re-invent all of them in URL.

We are not seeking to reinvent them.  Certainly one could use "urn:isbn:..."
for UIDs, there is nothing preventing that.


> I think the case for ISBN is no big difference from telephone number or
> zip code, etc.

The average person knows, understands, and uses telephone numbers and zip
codes all the time. The same cannot be said about ISBN. This is a big
difference.


> One may want to use good established practices instead of
> having to create a URL for them.

Established practices *on the Web* (which are what microformats are designed
for) typically use URLs.


>> Adding a URI property to any microformat would mean an expansion to the
>> vocabulary, when we already have several very close terms. I'd be wary of
>> doing that.
>> 
> 
> Is it possible to enumerate other alternatives? I am not well familar with
> all other choices, but I think both UID and URL have problems.

Please list the specific problems you've found with UID or URL, so we can
make sure they are documented and properly explored/resolved.

Thanks,

Tantek