ISNI did block off about a million of its identifiers for ORCID¡¯s use,
yes. This is because the two identifiers share a schema and neither
organization wanted there to be data integrity issues in a linked data
environment.
But that is the only case of ISNI assigning any intelligence to its
numbers, and it was done solely because ORCID did not wish to join
ISNI/ISO.
On 7/17/14, 4:09 PM, "Stuart Yeates" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>On 07/17/2014 03:49 AM, LAURA DAWSON wrote:
>
>> The new ISNI (for authors, illustrators, publishers, & other creators)
>> removes a lot of the internal semantics from the number string (except
>> there is a check digit, which occasionally renders as an X). There©ös no
>> ©øpublisher prefix©÷, for example - because ISNIs get assigned by the
>> central assignment agency at the request of organizations that need to
>>use
>> them. So they really are dumb numbers, which means that they are ideal
>>for
>> identification.
>
>Except that they're not.
>
>I've currently having a discussion at
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Authority_control#ISNI.2F_ORCI
>D_confusion
>where we're using delegation blocks to separate ORCIDs from other ISNIs.
>
>Isn't this exactly like ISBNs?
>
>cheers
>stuart
|
