I am in favor os supporting both, in the same way it is implemented below,
or in a slightly variation (using '?' instead of '/' or '_'), like
where the part after the number is actually optional, but present most of the time.
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 04:54:24PM +0100, Rodolphe Bailly wrote:
> Dear Antoine,
> We do both.
> The URI is
> We also generate and disseminate
> but the web server doesn't take into account what is behind the last "/".
> This way, Bach can decide to change his name is the future, he'll still have
> the same URI.
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Antoine Isaac [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Envoyι : mardi 24 mars 2015 15:45
> ΐ : [log in to unmask]
> Objet : Your advice on minting URIs for contextual entities
> Dear all,
> We're about to mint identifiers (URIs) for contextual entities to be used in
> Europeana. This will concern concepts, agents or places to be used for
> enrichment  and a couple of other things. The data will be adapted from
> external or providers' datasets, and will eventually have to be available as
> linked data on data.europeana.eu.
> After internal discussions, we have to choose between two options:
> 1. A bare numerical identifier, as in
> 2. A number combined with a human-readable label, as in
> In any case URIs would lead to machine-readable data for software clients,
> while humans would be directed to pages like . But human-readable labels
> in identifiers would help to identify and discuss the resources more easily.
> So option 2 is very tempting.
> However, option 2 is slightly harder to implement. Also, we would have to
> choose one field in the data, and one language (as we do for other
> communication, including this mail). Both field and language could change
> from one source to the other, when we merge different datasets.
> We're curious to hear whether you have a preference! We have created a small
> Note that it is not a a majority vote. We may end up not have the resource
> to implement the more complex option. Also, one could have a killer argument
> for one option, that defeats all other considerations :-). You can leave
> comments at the bottom of the poll page.
> Thanks a lot for the advice!
>  http://invis.io/RU2G1HUBG