> 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.