There is this unique identifier that is connected

Posted by Ellie on Nov 16, 2008 in Ontologies | 0 comments

Its way easier to think that you will unlikely use the same string to use different meanings in the same context.. This will unlikely promote the reuse of that URI. The base64 encoding of the tag is to obfuscate its originating string, yet base64 unlike hashing is lossless algorithm, which means that even if we lose information about the label connected to that identifier we can reconstruct it later. Also, the email address is hashed, to avoid abuse by spammers, for example only its unicity property is required, the rest of the information can be discarded.

This is redundant, but enables better digital preservation in the long term. But why numeric obfuscation of the tag? Well, humans cant avoid parsing textual information even in URIs. Its way easier to think that you will unlikely use the same string to use different meanings in the same context.. This will unlikely promote the reuse of that URI. For example, two different ethical groups in conflict might not like to use URI that was created based on the textual representation of that concept in the rival language.

For example, two different ethical groups in conflict might not like to use URI that was created based on the textual representation of that concept in the rival language. Sure, we could have used an incremental counter for those tags and forget about reuse we will see why in moment, but that requires different systems that you might use to be kept synchronized. This is redundant, but enables better digital preservation in the long term. But why numeric obfuscation of the tag? Well, humans cant avoid parsing textual information even in URIs. This will unlikely promote the reuse of that URI.