"identifier" naming problem

22 views
Skip to first unread message

Herbert Van de Sompel

unread,
Aug 15, 2017, 4:19:14 AM8/15/17
to signposting, Herbert Van de Sompel, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, uwe.h.s...@gmail.com, John Howard, Martin Fenner
Hi all,

I am getting in touch regarding the "identifier" relation type:

1.To alert early adopters that we ran into problems registering the "identifier" relation type with IANA because its naming is considered too generic. This means that we need to come up with another term for the relation type. And, consequently, that early adopters will unfortunately need to update their implementations, the Signposting website will need to be updated, Signposting communication materials will need to be edited, etc. Sincere apologies for that. Details are provided below.

2. To solicit inspiration for an alternative name for the relation type intended to convey: "the URI that is the target of this link is preferred for the purpose of referencing". Please send ideas. So far, the best candidates that we came up with are "reference-id" and "reflink".

Again, sincere apologies to early adopters.

Greetings

Herbert

===

Background regarding the problems with registering the "identifier" relation type
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

=> A first version of the Internet Draft to define the "identifier" relation type (advertised at http://signposting.org/identifier/) was submitted to the IETF. The official submission is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandesompel-identifier/. An easy-to-read version is at http://signposting.org/identifier/spec/.

=> Subsequently, a request to register the "identifier" relation type in the IANA link relation type registry (https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml) was submitted.

=> Following this request, a discussion ensued, see https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=link-relations&gbt=1&index=q7SEOhwd22fKV_QGL7G6a4RwufM. The discussion can be summarized as follows:

1. There were technical discussions about how "identifier" was different from "canonical" and "bookmark". Michael Nelson and I responded extensively to the concerns with this regard to the satisfaction of those who brought them up.

2. The discussion then drifted into the realm of unease by some with the "identifier" name chosen for the relation type. 

=> At that point, a mail was sent to Mark Nottingham who oversees the IANA Link Relation Type registration process to ask for advise. Mark's response was along the following lines:

- regarding (1): Add some additional wording in the I-D to further clarify the difference with "canonical" and "bookmark".

- regarding (2): "identifier" is VERY generic, and already an overloaded term on the Web. RFC5988bis cautions against registering overly-generic relations for specific use cases, and I think that applies here.

=> Since Mark Nottingham's mail strongly suggests that "identifier" is not acceptable, and because we want to be good web citizens, we are now in search of another name for the relation type. As mentioned above "reference-id" and "reflink" are the best candidates that were floated, so far.  

--
Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==

Paul Walk

unread,
Aug 16, 2017, 5:14:41 AM8/16/17
to Herbert van de Sompel, signposting, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, uwe.h.s...@gmail.com, John Howard, Martin Fenner
I quite like 'reflink' if you can get away with that. Or maybe 'preflink' (as in "preferred link")?

Paul
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/signposting/CAOywMHcsEb_hC7HAL-dmWhRC4zWDNdYt6cNuvNaeYyVofk99rQ%40mail.gmail.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-------------------------------------------
Paul Walk
http://www.paulwalk.net
-------------------------------------------





Herbert Van de Sompel

unread,
Aug 16, 2017, 8:39:50 AM8/16/17
to Paul Walk, signposting, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, uwe.h.s...@gmail.com, John Howard, Martin Fenner, Herbert Van de Sompel
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Paul Walk <pa...@paulwalk.net> wrote:
I quite like 'reflink' if you can get away with that. Or maybe 'preflink' (as in "preferred link")?


At this point, "reference-id" seems to be the term that the co-authors of the Internet Draft like best. 

I think "preflink" as in "preferred link" has the problem that it is not explicit about "preferred for what"? 

During the exchange on the IETF list, the argument was made that names for relation types should be meaningful/intuitive because most people don't read the RFCs that define them prior to using them. They use the relation types on the basis of their name & brief description:

- This came up regarding the "canonical" relation type: "canonical" is briefly described as "links to the preferred version" but what is really meant is "links to the preferred version for the purpose of content indexing". So, the intention of "canonical" is not immediately clear neither from its name nor from its brief description. Since people saw "preferred" without any qualification in the brief definition of "canonical" and saw "preferred for the purpose of referencing" in the brief description of our relation type, they concluded that our relation type was redundant, its intention already covered by "canonical". 

- This came up regarding our proposed "identifier" relation type: while our brief description was pretty clear ("preferred for the purpose of referencing"), the name was considered too generic, especially since all sources and targets of links are identifiers.

In this sense, reference-id and reflink address the desire to have a meaningful term:
- reference-id: an identifier for referencing
- reflink: a link for referencing

Other ideas, anyone?

Cheers

Herbert

 
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

> To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/signposting/CAOywMHcsEb_hC7HAL-dmWhRC4zWDNdYt6cNuvNaeYyVofk99rQ%40mail.gmail.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-------------------------------------------
Paul Walk
http://www.paulwalk.net
-------------------------------------------
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

John Howard

unread,
Aug 28, 2017, 12:57:08 AM8/28/17
to signposting, pa...@paulwalk.net, Andrea....@4science.it, chris...@dans.knaw.nl, linda.re...@dans.knaw.nl, richard....@dans.knaw.nl, uwe.h.s...@gmail.com, john.b...@ucd.ie, martin...@datacite.org, hvd...@gmail.com
I'd be happy with reference-d for sure, wonder if reference-link might also have virtue?

What are next steps from here?

John
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting...@googlegroups.com.

> To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/signposting/CAOywMHcsEb_hC7HAL-dmWhRC4zWDNdYt6cNuvNaeYyVofk99rQ%40mail.gmail.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-------------------------------------------
Paul Walk
http://www.paulwalk.net
-------------------------------------------





--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/signposting/3CB9A15D-F281-4CE0-81AA-D85DC97724CE%40paulwalk.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Herbert Van de Sompel

unread,
Aug 28, 2017, 3:59:33 AM8/28/17
to John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Uwe Schindler, Martin Fenner, Herbert Van de Sompel
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:57 AM, John Howard <john.b...@ucd.ie> wrote:
I'd be happy with reference-d for sure, wonder if reference-link might also have virtue?


Thanks for the suggestion, John. We'll take it on board. 

Another idea that has come up in communications between some co-authors of the I-D was "preferred-self". This one needs to be understood from the context of the RFC that defines the "self" relation, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287
 
What are next steps from here?


These are the action items:
- settle on a name for the relation type
- submit a new version of the I-D that uses the new name for the relation type
- submit a request to register the new relation type, which, this time around, will hopefully be successful
- once a relation type has been registered, ask early adopters to change implementations from using "identifier" to the new relation type name
- update pages at signposting.org (and promotional materials such as slide decks) accordingly
- further improve the I-D so that it eventually gets published as an RFC

Greetings

Herbert


 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Herbert Van de Sompel

unread,
Oct 4, 2017, 11:42:16 AM10/4/17
to John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Uwe Schindler, Martin Fenner, Herbert Van de Sompel
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvd...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:57 AM, John Howard <john.b...@ucd.ie> wrote:
I'd be happy with reference-d for sure, wonder if reference-link might also have virtue?


Thanks for the suggestion, John. We'll take it on board. 

Another idea that has come up in communications between some co-authors of the I-D was "preferred-self". This one needs to be understood from the context of the RFC that defines the "self" relation, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287
 
What are next steps from here?


These are the action items:
- settle on a name for the relation type
- submit a new version of the I-D that uses the new name for the relation type
- submit a request to register the new relation type, which, this time around, will hopefully be successful
- once a relation type has been registered, ask early adopters to change implementations from using "identifier" to the new relation type name
- update pages at signposting.org (and promotional materials such as slide decks) accordingly
- further improve the I-D so that it eventually gets published as an RFC


Well, it has taken a while to get through the first step above. The co-authors of the I-D have now reached agreement to go with "cite-as" as the relation type name to replace "identifier". Motivations:
- The co-authors who actually run persistent identifier infrastructure (one of the core use cases for the relation type) favored it
- It was suggested during the discussion on an IETF list in which "identifier" got ditched
- It is supported by Mark Nottingham who does the approvals of relation type names, meaning step 3 above is bound to be successful
- Although cite-as sounds rather bibliographic/library, it may be the most intuitive one compared to others contenders such as reflink, reference-link, ...

We intend to now proceed to step 2, above, and create a new version of the I-D that uses the cite-as relation type name.

Greetings

Herbert

Herbert Van de Sompel

unread,
Oct 17, 2017, 10:42:47 AM10/17/17
to John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Uwe Schindler, Martin Fenner, Herbert Van de Sompel
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvd...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:57 AM, John Howard <john.b...@ucd.ie> wrote:
I'd be happy with reference-d for sure, wonder if reference-link might also have virtue?


Thanks for the suggestion, John. We'll take it on board. 

Another idea that has come up in communications between some co-authors of the I-D was "preferred-self". This one needs to be understood from the context of the RFC that defines the "self" relation, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287
 
What are next steps from here?


These are the action items:
- settle on a name for the relation type
- submit a new version of the I-D that uses the new name for the relation type
- submit a request to register the new relation type, which, this time around, will hopefully be successful
- once a relation type has been registered, ask early adopters to change implementations from using "identifier" to the new relation type name
- update pages at signposting.org (and promotional materials such as slide decks) accordingly
- further improve the I-D so that it eventually gets published as an RFC



As per the above, a new version of the I-D, using the "cite-as" relation type, was submitted. See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandesompel-citeas/ .

I have also requested registration of "cite-as" but that is still in process. I will keep you posted.

Cheers

Herbert

Herbert Van de Sompel

unread,
Oct 27, 2017, 10:42:09 AM10/27/17
to John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Uwe Schindler, Martin Fenner, Herbert Van de Sompel
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Herbert Van de Sompel <hvd...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:57 AM, John Howard <john.b...@ucd.ie> wrote:
I'd be happy with reference-d for sure, wonder if reference-link might also have virtue?


Thanks for the suggestion, John. We'll take it on board. 

Another idea that has come up in communications between some co-authors of the I-D was "preferred-self". This one needs to be understood from the context of the RFC that defines the "self" relation, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287
 
What are next steps from here?


These are the action items:
- settle on a name for the relation type
- submit a new version of the I-D that uses the new name for the relation type
- submit a request to register the new relation type, which, this time around, will hopefully be successful
- once a relation type has been registered, ask early adopters to change implementations from using "identifier" to the new relation type name
- update pages at signposting.org (and promotional materials such as slide decks) accordingly
- further improve the I-D so that it eventually gets published as an RFC


I am happy to report that "cite-as" is now registered in the IANA link relation registry, see https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml. 

We are in the process of updating the Signposting site and related materials accordingly. I would like to kindly ask the implementers of "identifier" to change over to "cite-as" and please let me and/or the list know when this has happened.

Greetings

Herbert

Uwe Schindler

unread,
Oct 27, 2017, 11:22:38 AM10/27/17
to Herbert Van de Sompel, John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Martin Fenner

Hi Herbert,

 

I can change to „cite-as“ ASAP for PANGAEA, it’s just a change in 3 lines of code and deployment. Question: For backwards compatibility should we maybe send both headers during the next months? I am not sure who is already using signposting? We have no internal dependencies on it, but that’s just something that came to my mind.

 

Uwe

 

-----

UWE SCHINDLER

Software Architecture, Apache Lucene, Elasticsearch

PANGAEA - Data Publisher for Earth & Environmental Science

MARUM (Cognium building) - University of Bremen

Room 0510, Hochschulring 18, D-28359 Bremen

Tel.: +49 421 218 65595

Fax:  +49 421 218 65505

http://www.pangaea.de/

E-mail: uschi...@pangaea.de

 

Greetings

 

Herbert

 

 

 


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



 

--

Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==

Uwe Schindler

unread,
Oct 27, 2017, 12:29:56 PM10/27/17
to Herbert Van de Sompel, John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Martin Fenner

Moin moin,

 

Changed already (currently both links are delivered):

 

$ curl -I https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814

HTTP/1.1 200 OK

Server: PANGAEA/1.0

Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 16:23:38 GMT

Link: <https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814>;rel="cite-as", <https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814>;rel="identifier", <https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814>;rel="bookmark", <https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=metadata_jsonld>;rel="describedby";type="application/ld+json", <https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=citation_ris>;rel="describedby";type="application/x-research-info-systems", <https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=citation_bibtex>;rel="describedby";type="application/x-bibtex", <https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=html>;rel="item";type="text/html", <https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=textfile>;rel="item";type="text/tab-separated-values", <https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5212-9808>;rel="author"

X-robots-tag: index,follow,archive

Content-type: text/html;charset=UTF-8

Content-length: 77231

X-ua-compatible: IE=Edge

X-content-type-options: nosniff

Strict-transport-security: max-age=31536000

 

The “bookmark” link is also delivered. This was my alternate proposal to “cite-as”. IMHO a dataset should be bookmarked by it’s DOI (of course this does not yet work in most browsers).

 

Of course, PANGAEA also sends links in the HTML head (that’s automatic):

 

<link rel="cite-as" href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814">

<link rel="identifier" href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814">

<link rel="bookmark" href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814">

<link rel="describedby" href="https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=metadata_jsonld" type="application/ld+json">

<link rel="describedby" href="https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=citation_ris" type="application/x-research-info-systems">

<link rel="describedby" href="https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=citation_bibtex" type="application/x-bibtex">

<link rel="item" href="https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=html" type="text/html">

<link rel="item" href="https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880814?format=textfile" type="text/tab-separated-values">

<link rel="author" href="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5212-9808">

 

Uwe

 

-----

UWE SCHINDLER

Software Architecture, Apache Lucene, Elasticsearch

PANGAEA - Data Publisher for Earth & Environmental Science

MARUM (Cognium building) - University of Bremen

Room 0510, Hochschulring 18, D-28359 Bremen

Tel.: +49 421 218 65595

Fax:  +49 421 218 65505

http://www.pangaea.de/

E-mail: uschi...@pangaea.de

 

Herbert Van de Sompel

unread,
Oct 27, 2017, 12:35:49 PM10/27/17
to Uwe Schindler, John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Martin Fenner, Herbert Van de Sompel
hi Uwe,

Thanks a lot!

Regarding maintaining both "identifier" and "cite-as": I assume that at this point not too many (if any) client applications leverage "identifier". I think the relation type is not wide spread enough for clients to already take notice. As such, I would personally lean towards removing it all together sooner rather than later. Keeping it around might encourage adoption of a relation type that is no more ...

Cheers

Herbert

Greetings

 

Herbert

 

 

 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



 

--

Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==



 

--

Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.


To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/signposting/085b01d34f37%246bb47320%24431d5960%24%40pangaea.de.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/signposting/089901d34f40%24d286d7b0%2477948710%24%40pangaea.de.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Herbert Van de Sompel

unread,
Oct 27, 2017, 12:41:31 PM10/27/17
to Uwe Schindler, John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Martin Fenner
hey Uwe,

There is an extensive explanation regarding why "bookmark" intuitively sounds appropriate for what is intended by "cite-as" but is not. See http://ws-dl.blogspot.com/2017/08/2017-08-26-relbookmark-also-does-not.html

And there is also an explanation as to why "canonical" is not appropriate, see http://ws-dl.blogspot.com/2017/08/2017-08-07-relcanonical-does-not-mean.html

Just in case you would have some spare time to read this kind of stuff over the weekend ;-)

Cheers

Herbert



On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Uwe Schindler <uschi...@pangaea.de> wrote:

Greetings

 

Herbert

 

 

 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



 

--

Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==



 

--

Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.


To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/signposting/085b01d34f37%246bb47320%24431d5960%24%40pangaea.de.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/signposting/089901d34f40%24d286d7b0%2477948710%24%40pangaea.de.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Uwe Schindler

unread,
Oct 27, 2017, 1:15:21 PM10/27/17
to Herbert Van de Sompel, John Howard, signposting, Paul Walk, Andrea....@4science.it, Chris Baars, Linda Reijnhoudt, Richard van Heest, Martin Fenner

Thanks Herbert,

 

Canonical was never an option for me (as it is intended for Google to lead the robot to the most recent version). The “bookmark” was also an option, so we added it long time ago. But it never worked (as you described) for Ctrl-D.

 

I am still hoping to make it possible that you can tell the browser somehow to use a different link for bookmarking. There were options to do this with Javascript-Magic using a button “bookmark this”, but that’s impossible to do nowadays for security reasons. Maybe we should propose something?

 

I will remove the “identifier” and “bookmark” links soon. I just wanted to check that we don’t rely on it somehere in our own code. E.g., we have Javascript that takes the DOI link from the <meta> to create the “tweet this” or “post to facebook” links below the citation and at bottom of our pages. Try it out, if you click on the facebook link it shares with its DOI:

 

https://www.pangaea.de/assets/v.4c1b7b7b4e947f7582c1f948cb20588c/js/layout.js

 

Uwe

 

-----

UWE SCHINDLER

Software Architecture, Apache Lucene, Elasticsearch

PANGAEA - Data Publisher for Earth & Environmental Science

MARUM (Cognium building) - University of Bremen

Room 0510, Hochschulring 18, D-28359 Bremen

Tel.: +49 421 218 65595

Fax:  +49 421 218 65505

http://www.pangaea.de/

E-mail: uschi...@pangaea.de

 

From: Herbert Van de Sompel [mailto:hvd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 6:42 PM
To: Uwe Schindler <uschi...@pangaea.de>
Cc: John Howard <john.b...@ucd.ie>; signposting <signp...@googlegroups.com>; Paul Walk <pa...@paulwalk.net>; Andrea....@4science.it; Chris Baars <chris...@dans.knaw.nl>; Linda Reijnhoudt <linda.re...@dans.knaw.nl>; Richard van Heest <richard....@dans.knaw.nl>; Martin Fenner <martin...@datacite.org>
Subject: Re: [signposting] "identifier" naming problem

 

hey Uwe,

Greetings

 

Herbert

 

 

 


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



 

--

Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==



 

--

Herbert Van de Sompel
Digital Library Research & Prototyping
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Research Library
http://public.lanl.gov/herbertv/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-6126

==

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "signposting" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to signposting...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to signp...@googlegroups.com.


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages