<div dir="ltr"><br><div> Markus --- I think the answer to the question: "<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800000190734863px">Would a taxon DOI be a valuable feature for you?" really depends on some of the details. With a taxon name, you are putting a DOI on a string and one that has been dissociated from its source(s). I would think more valuable would be a DOI linked to the checklist that contained the name, and maybe a passthrough (a la suffix passthroughs in the EZID system) to the individual name. That way I can resolve that taxon name to the source from whence it came. </span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800000190734863px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800000190734863px">Best, Rob</span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800000190734863px"><br>
</span></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Markus Döring <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mdoering@gbif.org" target="_blank">mdoering@gbif.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hello Geoff,<br>
<br>
GBIF uses simples integers as taxon identifiers, for example 2396049 for Ecsenius bicolor.<br>
These ids are stable, but obviously not globally unique. If you need a URI right now I would recommend for now to use our restful portal URL:<br>
<a href="http://www.gbif.org/species/2396049" target="_blank">http://www.gbif.org/species/2396049</a><br>
<br>
For the future I could imagine us assigning DOIs to taxa reusing the current integer ids, but that has to be carefully evaluated first.<br>
Would a taxon DOI be a valuable feature for you?<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Markus<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Markus Döring<br>
Software Developer<br>
Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF)<br>
<a href="mailto:mdoering@gbif.org">mdoering@gbif.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.gbif.org" target="_blank">http://www.gbif.org</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 05 Aug 2014, at 05:17, Geoff Shuetrim <<a href="mailto:geoff@galexy.net">geoff@galexy.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Working with a range of web services, I have found myself making extensive use of the LSIDs that are specific to each data source. For example, for ITIS, I use the Ecsenius bicolor LSID: urn:lsid:itis.gov:itis_tsn:636326<br>
><br>
> For WoRMS, the LSID for Ecsenius bicolor is: urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:277652<br>
><br>
> For Atlas of living Australia the LSID for Ecsenius bicolor is:<br>
> urn:lsid:biodiversity.org.au:afd.taxon:99c29e7c-5b04-4e57-8e6b-82aa442a801a<br>
><br>
> Is there a GBIF LSID that can similarly be used as a unique identifier for a taxon? I have come across the various GBIF unique keys but these are not unique outside of the GBIF environment and within the Gaia Guide systems I am deciding how best to work with these, ensuring their uniqueness, alongside identifiers from other data sources.<br>
><br>
> Thanks again for your assistance.<br>
><br>
> Geoff Shuetrim<br>
> Gaia Guide Association<br>
> <a href="http://www.gaiaguide.info/" target="_blank">http://www.gaiaguide.info/</a><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> API-users mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:API-users@lists.gbif.org">API-users@lists.gbif.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users" target="_blank">http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
API-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:API-users@lists.gbif.org">API-users@lists.gbif.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users" target="_blank">http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>