[Nhcoll-l] global unique identifiers and natural history collections

Sun Oct 14 20:36:39 EDT 2012

  Hi all --- Others did a great job of covering the problem with using
a triple of institution code, collection code and collection number.
 The issue with resolvability and persistence are really important.
When you get a unique identifier for a record, you want to be able to
_do_ something with it.   Something really simple.  Digital Object
Identifiers are now minted for a couple different purposes.  They are
associated with published papers, and they are associated with
datasets in repositories such as Dryad.  For example, here is one:
10.3897/zookeys.209.3699 that resolves to a paper by Vince Smith and
Vladimir Blagoderov titled "Bringing collections out of the dark").
If you go here:  http://dx.doi.org/ and enter that DOI, voila!  You
get back to the paper.

What is handy is DOIs associated with published journal articles are
now incorporated into electronic "references cited" sections, so you
can immediately go from a cited reference to the document at the
journal home.  There are similar use cases we see in the short term
and long term where immediately resolving a DOI to a specimen or its
specimen record would be _very_ handy indeed.  All that is needed is
that DOI placed in a specimen record.  It doesn't replace any other
information!  It just rides along with the other data you have in a
database.

What is also great about DOIs is that they are probably a long term
solution.  The publishing industry uses them and the services for
resolving are there.   Although it has taken me a long time to really
get (or get into) this whole business of unique identifiers in the
context of the World Wide Web, they are beginning to really become
pervasive as they get more and more often attached to datasets, and
ultimately, I think, to data records.

So what still might be confusing is what is an EZID versus a DOI or
other identifiers.  Simply put, there is a value to work with service
providers that have expertise with global unique identifiers.  EZIDs
help with redistribution of DOIs (and also another form identifier
called ARKs that have some useful properties).    Those service
providers might be closer to the community and be able to help work
out some issues for community X that are different from community Y.
Documents aren't datasets or data records, so what works for
publishing journal articles doesn't necessarily work for us in the
collections community.  The value of working with a chain of providers
is that maybe we can leverage the good parts services while tailoring
how it works to be community specific.  At least that is the hope.

I am still working out  how best to explain a lot of this, but
appreciate the great followups and excellent questions.  I feel like
we might get someplace if discussions keep happening.  Thanks for
taking the time to look stuff over and sending along great questions.

Best, Rob
https://sites.google.com/site/robgur/

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Cellinese,Nico
<ncellinese at flmnh.ufl.edu> wrote:
> Indeed, uniqueness is crucial! Additionally, IDs need to be persistent and
> resolvable.  None of these can be guaranteed by self-minted GUIDs that are
> created using institution acronyms.
>
> Nico
>
>
> On Oct 14, 2012, at 6:09 PM, <CSTURMJR at pitt.edu>
>  <CSTURMJR at pitt.edu> wrote:
>
> Curtis,
>
> One problem that comes to mind is CMNH as an identifier.
> I have seen this used for:
> Carnegie Museum of Natural History ( my preference!)
> Cleveland Museum of Natural History
> Cincinnati Museum of Natural History
>
> It could also be used for:
> Colorado (University) Museum of Natural History
> Canadian Museum of Natural History.
>
> Thus, one would have to standardize museum acronyms.
>
> <font face="Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
>
> size="2"><div>Forgive my ignorance, as I'm new to the collections world,
>
> but could someone please provide more detail about what you are talking
>
> about exactly? What is wrong with the use of museum acronyms followed by
>
> numbers? Or...am I missing something? Aren't these "global unique
>
> identifiers"? What are the drawbacks to using these in the traditional
>
> manner? Also, how feasible would it be for all the collections to
>
> essentially renumber their entire collections to participate in this new
>
> system? Please help me understand what this discussion is
>
> about.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks!</div><div><br></div><div>Curtis<br><br>______________________________<br><br>Curtis
>
> J. Schmidt<br>Zoological Collections Manager<br>Sternberg Museum of
>
> Natural History<br>Fort Hays State University <br>3000 Sternberg
>
> Drive<br>Hays, KS  67601<br>(785) 628-5504 (collections)<br>(785) 650-2447
>
> (cell)<br>______________________________</div><br><br><font
>
> color="#990099"><span><a class="smarterwiki-linkify"
>
> href="mailto:-----nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu">-----nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu</a>
>
> wrote: -----</span></font><div style="padding-left:5px;"><div
>
> style="padding-right:0px;padding-left:5px;border-left:solid black
>
> 2px;"><span>To: "Bentley, Andrew Charles" &lt;<a
>
> class="smarterwiki-linkify"
>
> href="mailto:abentley at ku.edu">abentley at ku.edu</a>&gt;</span><br>From:
>
> Robert Guralnick <robert.guralnick at colorado.edu><br><span>Sent by: <a
>
> class="smarterwiki-linkify"
>
> href="mailto:nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu">nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu</a></span><br>Date:
>
> 10/14/2012 01:33PM<br><span>Cc: <a class="smarterwiki-linkify"
>
> href="mailto:tomc at cs.uoregon.edu,">tomc at cs.uoregon.edu,</a> "NH-COLL
>
> listserv <a class="smarterwiki-linkify"
>
> href="mailto:\(nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu\)">\(nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu\)</a>"
>
> &lt;<a class="smarterwiki-linkify"
>
> href="mailto:nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu">nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu</a>&gt;,
>
> John Deck &lt;<a class="smarterwiki-linkify"
>
> href="mailto:jdeck at berkeley.edu">jdeck at berkeley.edu</a>&gt;, Nico
>
> Cellinese &lt;<a class="smarterwiki-linkify"
>
> href="mailto:ncellinese at flmnh.ufl.edu">ncellinese at flmnh.ufl.edu</a>&gt;</span><br>Subject:
>
> Re: %5
>
>
>
> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>
> Nico Cellinese, Ph.D.
> Assistant Curator, Botany & Informatics
> Joint Assistant Professor, Department of Biology
>
> Florida Museum of Natural History
> University of Florida
> 354 Dickinson Hall, PO Box 117800
> Gainesville, FL 32611-7800, U.S.A.
> Tel. 352-273-1979
> Fax 352-846-1861
> http://cellinese.blogspot.com/
>
>
>