[Dataset] Identifiers in Party package
mdittmar at cfa.harvard.edu
Wed Apr 27 17:12:35 CEST 2016
This is follow-up from a comment by Marcus during the previous review
period which I'd like to discuss further to clarify the scope and details.
The comments are related to the various identifier attributes in the
+ Curation.publisherDID:anyURI = IVOA Identifier format
+ DataID.creatorDID:anyURI = IVOA Identifier format
+ DataID.datasetID:anyURI = persistent identifier
? Publication.refCode:string = doi or bibcode or free text
+ Publisher.publisherID:anyURI = IVOA Identifier of the publisher (rather
than the dataset)
> I'd much rather see an Identifier type:
> Identifier.kind: (publisher, creator, persistent, ...)
> Identifier.form: (doi, ivoid, generic-uri, ...)
> Identifier.value: (well, you know).
> [kind and form would be open vocabularies with recommended terms defined
in the standard).
>(10) Having said that, I think orcids will become a smash hit in the near
future if they aren't one already. Hence, I'd add
> to the Party attributes. The stuff on defining identifiers as in (7)
> applies here, too (if we go the URI way, we should say whether we
> want orcid:0000-... or http://orcid.org/0000-...)
I like the idea of having an Identifier Type which makes it easier to
migrate flavors of identifiers. I think I would prefer subclassing a base
Identifier type, rather than having a 'form' attribute.
The 'kind' attribute comes from the suggestion that all the Dataset related
Identifiers be assembled to a common list:
which I'm also not in favor of.
So.. lets say we have an Identifier type, with some means of specifying the
flavor (ivoaid, doi, bibcode, orcid, generic-uri).
We want to apply this type to:
+ Objects (Dataset IDs) == bibcode, doi, ivoaid, generic
+ Party-s (Publisher) == ivoaid, orcid, generic
1) How do we restrict the flavors which would be allowed for the various
We don't want to see a 'bibcode' for the Publisher ID
Perhaps 'form' as semanticconcept facilitates this.. allowing the
same form under multiple topconcepts?
2) Associating it with the Party..
It's not clear to me if the identifier should be associated with the
Party, or the Role.
The same Individual can have multiple Identifiers which serve
different roles. I have a Passport and a
driver's license. In some cases, I can use either ID; but I cannot
show the policeman my Passport when
I am a driver, or the TSA agent my driver's licence when I'm a
So, in some sense, I'd like to see the Role associated with a single
Identifier which is appropriate for that role.
However, let's say we have a Contact
Contact extends Role which refers to an Individual
If we swap out the Individual playing this role, then the identifier
on Role would also need to change.. which
doesn't seem right.
3) Where should this type live?
There was an Identity type in the 'ivoa' base types model which leans
in this direction, but is not the same.
Or it could be defined in the Party package.. assuming we incorporate
it to some object there.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dm