Sorry, I did not mean to start a war of any kind. Pls. allow me to
restate my question.
My hypothesis is that most of us are considering our persistent
identifiers to be traditional URLs, although LC for one is using handles
and CDL is pioneering with ARKs. If your institution could follow in
that 'although' clause in some way, I would be interested to know. (As
we work through the design phase for our own context, my question to
myself is: "Do we need to be worrying about setting up some non-URL
persistent identifier system at this stage?"--to which I want to be
comfortable answering "No.")
From: PREMIS Implementors Group Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Rebecca S. Guenther
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 2:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PIG] Handle System
I don't think we want to get into identifier wars. For instance, LC uses
handles to identify content with a persistent identifier.
As far is PREMIS is concerned any persistent identifier may be used and
you can indicate the type of indicator in the appropriate identifierType
We'll never agree on which identifier it should be.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Charles Blair wrote:
> i'll beg the question and say that for preservation archiving you
> should (also) be looking at ARKs, which were designed for the purpose: