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
eric_at_hellman.net
http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/
Received on Tue Sep 15 2009 - 12:05:43 EDT