Friday March 06th 2009, 1:54 am
Filed under: Uncategorized
Filed under: Uncategorized
Recently, I have been having troubling dreams of identifiers and classifications. Something is missing in my soup. Also, our public library system is surprisingly behind the times on providing basic public services such as universal global identifiers. (come to think of it, who does provide such a thing?)
Update: As Jeremy Baron points out, the development of WikiData helps move us much closer to having a functional perpetual cauldron of soup. Huzzah!
Wikipedia provides unique identifiers for things, though of course they are not necessarily stable over time.
Comment by Daf 03.10.09 @ 7:09 pmYes, it provides a type of unique identifier – but only for encyclopedic nouns. you can’t use that as a global service to provide unique id’s for things that might become encyclopedic iun the futurek, or for subparts of things that might be notable — they would be deleted often without a redirect under currentp olicies.
Implementing the WP model recursively to cover all forms and granularities of knowledge would satisfy what I had in mind, that is certain.
Comment by metasj 05.07.09 @ 4:38 pmWikipedia come close to providing this service for encyclopedic topics. It expressly does not offer this as a general service, nor as one for buildings, people, works, or other interesting objects that would benefit from same.
I would like something a bit more explicitly maintained and protected than Wikipedia’s provision of a reference for a topic (applied to these other nouns, starting with creative and created works), but that would do for starters. The LOC should be able to match the casual authority file service provided by this volunteer enterprise.
Comment by metasj 03.21.09 @ 10:05 pmnot exactly sure if this is what you are talking about, but we use ProductOntology to create identifiers and product types.
Comment by Bipper Media 01.09.20 @ 12:16 pmA slightly different use case, but that’s helpful to know!
Comment by metasj 03.14.20 @ 7:59 pm