> 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.