--On Thursday, July 02, 2015 16:06 +0200 Stephane Bortzmeyer
<bortzmeyer(_at_)nic(_dot_)fr> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 07:48:29PM +1200,
Brian E Carpenter <brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote
a message of 9 lines which said:
"if we want something widely recognized in the information and
documentation world" the only realistic answer today is DOIs.
We don't live in the same world, then (where I live, ARKs are
more common).
Sorry, should have added ARKs to my list, making it at least
ARK, DOI, ERS, and URN (in alphabetical order) but that just
makes the point that there are a lot of these schemes.
Other than the "eat your own dogfood" principle, it unclear to
me that any particular one of them is a clear choice. Maybe the
choice of DOIs is more or less arbitrary or reflects a
too-narrow community of discussion (raising, again, the question
of why the community is being asked only now). But, if this is
going to be posted as an IAB document, I think the IAB is
obligated to explain the decision, rather than putting up a
document that strongly implies that DOIs are the only plausible
choice.
Or perhaps we should be publishing and using _all_ of these
identifiers, on theories usually described as "let the
marketplace decide" or "let a hundred flowers blossom".
john