In practice there are a number of systems for persistent identifiers, such as the Handle System, Purls, Uniform Resource Name (URN), Archival Resource Keys (ARK), and Extensible Resource Identifier (XRI). There is a good overview by Juha Hakala How do you best combine these identifiers with "cool" linked data URIs? Can you take these URI prefixes as canonical for the persistent identifiers systems mentioned above?:
At least Purl and XRI could made compatible with cool URIs, but for Purl you would need to hack the resolver at purl.org. My question is not about which system is better and whether to use other identifiers but HTTP-URIs at all, but about what to do if you already have these other identifiers and their infrastructure. You could create a HTTP proxy but Handle and Purl already have their resolver infrastructure. I'd be interested in solutions where people actually use a non-HTTP-URI-infrastructure system combined with a Linked Data environment. Can you avoid adding
asked 08 Mar '11, 14:38
I had a project where we had a dataset in a SPARQL store. It consisted entirely of
answered 08 Mar '11, 15:49
The Virtuoso Sponger Middleware enables the development of Custom Resolvers for naming schemes (e.g., URNs) associated with protocols beyond HTTP, including DOI, OAI & LSID.
Virtuoso has an owl:sameAs inference rule, so you can have co-referents in Virtuoso that have URIs based on different schemes. When said context is enabled you end up with a union of all data that is accessible to SPARQL or exposable at an Address associated with any of the co-Referents entity names references (URI based Names). See owl:sameAs inference tutorial also.
answered 09 Mar '11, 23:41