> From: Thomas Berger > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 4:46 PM > Maybe I have been following that subthread to lazily, but I think the > discussion there mainly was about what URIs could be used to identify an > instance of a bf:Identifier (or comparable constructs in any scheme) as a > resource and the advice was to treat them as anonymous nodes whenever > possible, or at least and completely counter-intuitive to provide them with > almost meaningless, as local as possible, URIs. I think the advice is: (1) don't use a URI to identify a bf:Identifier. Treat it as a blank node. (2) Only a non-URI identifier (e.g. isbn) should be treated a bf:Identifier. (I.e. a URI should not be treated as a bf:Identifer. Thus the property bf:uri should be eliminated.) I think there is consensus on this, someone correct me if I’m wrong. Ray