Transcript Richardson LSID

TDWG Life Sciences Identifiers
Applicability Statement
Ben Richardson
Review Manager, LSID Applicability Statement
Western Australian Herbarium
Department of Environment and Conservation
urn:lsid:biocol.org:col:15701
Public Review
• Details at:
– http://bit.ly/p7Hwp
• Comments open until 26 November
What is an Applicability
Statement?
• An advisory document rather than a
specification
• The “glue” that connects technical
specifications
• Documents how to best apply relevant
technical specifications
• Specifies what is to be done to
conform to a specification
Review Process
• Prior to April 2009
– Submissions on the Applicability Statement (AS) received
from 4 peer reviewers
• Late April 2009
– I agreed to be Review Manager for the LSID AS
• May 2009
– I requested a revision based on reviewers comments and
discussion on the Technical Architecture Group mailing list
• 22 October
– Revision accepted for Public Review
• 26 October
– Public Review begins
Applicability Statement in
two sections
• GUID Applicability Statement
• LSID Applicability Statement
Part 1. GUID Applicability
Statement
• The GUID AS provides an overview
– Documents the recommendations that apply to
all GUID technologies
• There are 6 types of GUID technology
– HTTP URI
– Life Sciences Identifiers (LSID)
– Digital Object Identifiers (DOI)  a type of
Handle
– Permanent URL (PURL)  a type of HTTP URI
– Universally Unique Identifier (UUID)
– Handle System
GUID Recommendation Summary
• One object must have only one GUID
• Only assign GUIDs to objects for which
you are the authority
• Support the Semantic Web
– HTTP GET resolution must be provided
– Default metadata response format
= TDWG Ontology RDF/XML
Part 2. LSID Applicability
Statement
• Documents best application of LSIDs
for biodiversity domain to
– Maximise LSID permanence
– Explain LSID concepts of “data” and
“metadata”
– Support the Semantic Web
LSID Recommendation Summary
— Maximising Persistence
• Providers should control domain names used in LSIDs
• Avoid using your organization’s domain name if it is
susceptible to change
– If this is problematic, apply to use TDWG’s domain
– Case in point: calm.wa.gov.au  dec.wa.gov.au
• Don’t parse the LSID string (except to resolve it)
– E.g. urn:lsid:authority.org:name:1234:2a
• “authority.org” may no longer own the data
• “name” might be a person rather than a taxon
– Get the metadata to be certain
LSID Recommendation Summary
— LSID “data” vs “metadata”
• LSID “data” must never change
• Non-binary encoded objects should be
served as LSID “metadata”
– Taxon name, concept, occurrence data is
LSID “metadata”
– Images, audio, video is LSID “data”
LSID Recommendation Summary
— Semantic Web support
• Provide a HTTP proxy version of the
LSID
• HTTP GET must retrieve LSID
“metadata” by default
• LSID “metadata” must be RDF/XML
– Makes biodiversity data easily accessible
to Semantic Web clients that can’t resolve
LSIDs
What next?
• With some care, LSIDs are the best fit for
biodiversity data
– LSID permanence is enhanced by their
independence from Internet protocol
– Domain Name requirements can be overcome
– Semantic Web clients can be supported
– However:
• HTTP URIs and PURLs are simpler to implement
• DOIs already exist for publications, use them if
available
What next?
• Use the Applicability Statement
– Decide whether LSIDs will work for you
• If so, implement LSIDs  many
projects already have
• Integrate your GUIDs with everyone
else’s data
What next?
• Complete the TDWG Ontology in RDF
Acknowledgements
• Reviewers
• GUID Applicability Statement
– Author: Kevin Richards
• LSID Applicability Statement
– Authors: Ricardo Pereira, Kevin Richards,
Donald Hobern, Roger Hyam, Lee Belbin,
and Stan Blum
• Lee Belbin  review process
Public Review
http://bit.ly/p7Hwp
Comments open until
26 November
Merci beaucoup