[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Handle-info] Expressing handles as URIs



Thanks, Robert. It seems like the http URI idiom is preferred, although, as the info-uri page notes, conflating identity and addressability is fraught.

We assign handles to all our objects in our Fedora repository. The objects themselves are made up of different bits, which are implemented in Fedora as datastreams, which (mostly) map to files or bitstreams. Each datastream has an ID. We use the PREMIS metadata standard to track events on these datastreams.

So for example, a creation event could be recorded for the Dublin Core datastream on my object SampleObject, using the URI https://hdl.handle.net/1711/SampleObject#DC.0 ("DC" is the datastream ID in the object, ".0" is the version of the datastream).

Only https://hdl.handle.net/1711/SampleObject could be dereferenced; the fragment piece would be ignored if anyone followed that link.

-- Scott


On 11/28/2017 12:45 PM, Robert R Tupelo-Schneck wrote:
You are correct that hdl: is not a formally recognized URI scheme, although that hasn’t stopped a fair amount of use of hdl: and doi: over the years. We do not recommend the info-uri scheme, which has been more-or-less deprecated by its originators for some years now. See

http://info-uri.info

Another option is to use an http: or https: URI, like https://hdl.handle.net/NA/XXXXX#FRAGMENT.

As to whether you are better off with hdl: or hdl.handle.net depends on what you are trying to accomplish and we don’t know enough about PREMIS and your particular use case to offer anything too authoritative. The proxy version, hdl.handle.net, is more easily integrated into various applications that are expecting URLs while the hdl: version is cleaner, could be used in dedicated applications without going through the proxy system, but is not officially blessed.

We'd be interested to hear more about what use you are making of #-fragments.

Robert

On Nov 27, 2017, at 12:36 PM, Scott Prater <scott.prater@wisc.edu> wrote:

What is the best practice to express a handle as a URI?  We've been using the convention "hdl:NA/XXXX..." for a while now, but reading through the handle RFCs and past list traffic, it looks like there is not an official "hdl" URI scheme, but that handles could be expressed within the info URI scheme (i.e. "info:hdl/NA/XXXX..."), as the "hdl" namespace is registered in the "info" registry[1].

We would like to use handles as PREMIS object identifiers, and express fragments as part of an identifier (not necessarily locatable, but that's okay -- these are URIs, not URLs).  I'm wondering if this is legal:

"hdl:NA/XXXXX#FRAGMENT"

or if this is preferred:

"info:hdl/NA/XXXXXX#FRAGMENT" (per the info URI schema).

[1] http://info-uri.info/registry/OAIHandler?verb=ListRecords&metadataPrefix=oai_dc

thanks,

-- Scott

--
Scott Prater
Shared Development Group
General Library System
University of Wisconsin - Madison

_______________________________________________
Handle-Info mailing list
Handle-Info@cnri.reston.va.us
http://www.handle.net/mailman/listinfo/handle-info


--
Scott Prater
Digital Library Analyst
UW Digital Collections Center
University of Wisconsin - Madison

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
Handle-Info mailing list
Handle-Info@cnri.reston.va.us
http://www.handle.net/mailman/listinfo/handle-info