 |
 |
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