I'm looking into how osisIDs can be used to unambiguously and precisely identify an exact edition/revision of a work. The manual states:<br><br><blockquote style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">
The parts of an osisID may contain any mixture of numbers, letters, and underscores. <br>[…]<br></blockquote><blockquote style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">
The prefix to an osisID must contain at least one letter, number or underscore, that may be followed by any <br>number of letters, numbers or underscores, separated by periods, and concluding in a colon ":"<br>
</blockquote>
<br>The example prefixes found in the manual are:<br><br>Bible.en.ABS.CEV.1995<br>Bible.en.NIV.1984<br>Bible.en.KJV<br>Bible.KJV<br><br>The following illustrates the components:<br><br>Bible(.$lang)?(.$publisher)?.$abbr(.$year)?<br>
<br>It would seem that all components are needed to unambiguously identify a work. Furthermore, in order to precisely identify a particular revision, some more granularity should be possible (these numbers I am making up):<br>
<br>Bible.en.ABS.CEV.19950123123000<br><br>And not only ISO timestamp, but also a revision number (or edition number) seems like it would be necessary:<br><br>Bible.en.ABS.CEV.19950123123000.r273<br>or<br>Bible.en.ABS.CEV.ed2.19950123123000<br>
<br>Is there some standard for constructing these more granular osisIDs to precisely identify works? Having a standard format would be ideal so that the information can be parsed out of the osisID.<br><br>Thanks!<br>Weston<br>