TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Permanent Identifiers for the Web

58 pointsby r0mualdover 9 years ago

12 comments

btraskover 9 years ago
Adding layers of indirection isn&#x27;t going to give us a permanent addressing system. This service just adds new points of failure: the service itself, or the creator of an identifier who fails to update it or changes it maliciously.<p>The real solution is some form of content addressing. Whichever one you want: URNs, magnet links, the &quot;ni:&quot; RFC[1], IPFS paths[2], or my own hash link system[3].<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;tools.ietf.org&#x2F;html&#x2F;rfc6920" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;tools.ietf.org&#x2F;html&#x2F;rfc6920</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ipfs.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ipfs.io&#x2F;</a><p>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;btrask&#x2F;stronglink&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;btrask&#x2F;stronglink&#x2F;</a>
评论 #10831998 未加载
themartoranaover 9 years ago
I suppose it&#x27;s a good project with good intentions, but it&#x27;s still only as useful as the content it points to. Take, for instance, Geocities - the amazing free platform where everyone was experimenting with websites at the same time.<p>It&#x27;s all gone.<p>A permanent URL helps not-at-all. True, the Web Archive has a lot of old Geocities pages cached, but most of the time I find something missing, the content is gone. It has nothing to do with the wrong URL.<p>That said, it&#x27;s a nice way to claim a &quot;permanent&quot; URL for say, yourself. It lets you change domain names and whatnot in the future.<p>Still, I don&#x27;t mean to downplay the good intentions. I just wonder what the half-life of the database is - that is, before half of all claimed perm URLs point to nothing.
评论 #10831879 未加载
detaroover 9 years ago
Aren&#x27;t DOIs already pretty established for that, at least for scientific sources? <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.doi.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.doi.org&#x2F;</a><p>Granted, they don&#x27;t have nice names, but the namespace will get cluttered and full anyways.
评论 #10832032 未加载
ricticover 9 years ago
IPFS solves this problem far better.<p>It marries content addressing, DHT+bittorrent-style distribution, and public key cryptography.<p>In the low level ipfs namespace content is identified with its hash. Content may be either a file or a directory, which is a map of names to hashes.<p>In the higher level ipns namespace content is associated with the hash of its current content and the public key of the agent that&#x27;s allowed to update this hash.<p>A hypothetical that I found motivational:<p>The New York Times writes an article that includes a link to a source, say a scientific paper. As an organization, they make the decision to care about their articles being available with necessary context, so they link to the paper&#x27;s hash within IPFS and configure their servers to maintain and serve all IPFS content that they ever link to. In this way, even when the original host of the report goes offline the New York Times is able to ensure that their article&#x27;s links continue to work.
mbleighover 9 years ago
We already have permanent identifiers for the web...they&#x27;re called URLs. This seems like a super-unnecessary level of indirection.
评论 #10831731 未加载
评论 #10831673 未加载
quotemstrover 9 years ago
We&#x27;ve had unique ID technology for decades: the GUID. You can access it with uuidgen. A unique <i>name</i> is not the same as an enduring, universal set of directions for reaching the <i>named content</i>.
gue5tover 9 years ago
This is another global centralized namespace. I thought we had learned to avoid this mistake when we all saw how bad the domain-name system was.
johanschover 9 years ago
Most pretentious URL shortener ever? :)
评论 #10831724 未加载
benologistover 9 years ago
This is a cool idea, but making links via pull requests through Github isn&#x27;t very enticing. A more efficient&#x2F;faster API for automation and complete anonymity are minimum required features in my opinion.
cetaceaover 9 years ago
We already have the DOI system. Why is a new system needed?
评论 #10831768 未加载
bmn_over 9 years ago
Lots of misunderstanding going on in the comments. Let me set your confusion right.<p>w3id.org is basically the same as purl.org, see <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Persistent_uniform_resource_locator" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Persistent_uniform_resource_lo...</a> for a background explanation. They are services that promise to be extremely stable and long lived and where you coin permanent URLs for certain Web technologies (e.g. Link relations RFC 5988 §4.2, XML namespaces, …) that require an identifier that never changes. So in theory you can put any well-formed URI there because most of the time, software will just compare for URI equivalence (RFC 3986 §6), but if a user wants to, he can also dereference the resource identifier and possibly arrive at a human readable document describing what&#x27;s going on, for example visit <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.w3.org&#x2F;2001&#x2F;XMLSchema" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.w3.org&#x2F;2001&#x2F;XMLSchema</a> in your Web browser. You cannot do this with content addressable IDs (named hashes&#x2F;ni scheme, IPFS, DHT), URNs (guid&#x2F;uuid scheme), etc. In order to achieve that practical goal, the dereferenced document needs to be published on a Web host, and the domain name associated with the Web host needs to be under your control.<p>Now, for coining purls, you put in an indirection. When you lose control of your domain name, simply redirect to a new one. In practice this eliminates link rot. There are other things on the Web that make use of redirection mentioned among these comments, like archives and link shortening, but that&#x27;s out of scope for purls – you are not supposed to coin purls for general Web documents like news articles (millions a years), but specific documents whose URI serves as an identifier for a schema description or the like (dozens a year).<p>The difference between the different purl services is their governance model. IMO w3id is best aligned with the interests of hackers that make use of Web technology.
jrochkind1over 9 years ago
So on the one hand, we&#x27;re already supposed to have permanent identifiers, and they&#x27;re called URIs&#x2F;URLs.<p>On the other hand, what is it that makes URL&#x27;s fail even if the content still exists on the web?<p>Generally, changes in platforms hosting the content, that addresses them differently.<p>It is not technically hard to provide redirection yourself that redirects from the old URLs to the new ones. If the new platform still uses the same internal identifiers for each piece of content, it may be as simple as a one-line apache httpd or nginx redirect, from `<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.com&#x2F;get&#x2F;thing&#x2F;$ID`" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.com&#x2F;get&#x2F;thing&#x2F;$ID`</a> to `<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.com&#x2F;find&#x2F;it&#x2F;here&#x2F;$ID`" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.com&#x2F;find&#x2F;it&#x2F;here&#x2F;$ID`</a> or whatever. If the internal identifiers have changed, it&#x27;s a pain to list the mapping -- but that pain doesn&#x27;t actually diminish much at all with this w3id.org service, you&#x27;re still going to have to update all the URLs individually with their service.<p>Another possibility is that your hostname has changed; as long as you haven&#x27;t lost the ownership of the old domain though, it is still not technically hard to point it to the same place as your new one, and then you&#x27;re reduced to the same situation as above.<p>So it&#x27;s not technically hard to provide the URL redirection yourself locally. If you want to provide your own platform-idenpendent &quot;permanent identifiers&quot; from the start, there&#x27;s even several open source packages meant to help you do it yourself, locally.<p>On the other hand,it is another thing to think about, another thing to maintain and monitor. Nearly everything else one can think of, even things not that hard to do locally, especially if they might require running another service locally, is being &#x27;outsourced&#x27; to &quot;X As a Service&quot; platforms.<p>So, okay, why not &#x27;permanent&#x27; identifiers too? I wish people would just take care of it themselves, the way the web was intended. And I wish w3id.org actually just identified themselves as &quot;permanent identifiers as a service&quot; or whatever, instead of implying that they&#x27;re doing something fundamentally different than plain old URL redirection you can do not too difficultly yourself.<p>And it is important to note that you are relying on the continued existence and maintenance of the w3id.org hostname and service behind it for &quot;permanence&quot;. When &quot;permanent&quot; is in the name, the risks of relying on an &quot;_ as a service&quot; provider are higher, you can&#x27;t really switch to a different provider later, you&#x27;re stuck with them literally forever, and counting on them existing as long as you need your identifiers to.<p>But it&#x27;s not too surprising if people are looking for &quot;permanent identifiers as a service&quot;, they&#x27;re looking for nearly everything as a service. On the other other hand, most entities don&#x27;t seem to care about permanence in their URI&#x27;s _at all_ -- if you are at the point where you realize it&#x27;s important, I&#x27;d think you&#x27;d be the kind of entity to have the technical capacity to implement it yourself locally too, and then have true local control over the &#x27;permanence&#x27; of identifiers, not have to rely on a third party continuing to be maintained.