> Are there really any identifiers that we care that aren't already mapped to URNs? If yes, isn't the solution to map them to URNs?

+1

---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library

On Jul 17, 2014, at 4:34 PM, Stuart Yeates <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On 07/17/2014 09:39 AM, Denenberg, Ray wrote:
>> 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.
>
> In real systems, won't ISBNs be represented as URNs in the namespace URN:ISBN:... as defined by http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3187.txt ?
>
> Are there really any identifiers that we care that aren't already mapped to URNs? If yes, isn't the solution to map them to URNs?
>
> cheers
> stuart