Bibsonomy seems to suffer from the same problem as CiteULike - urls
which convey no meaning. An example url id from CiteULike is 2434335,
and one from Bibsonomy is 29be860f0bdea4a29fba38ef9e6dd6a09. I hope to
continue to steer the conversation away from that direction. These IDs
guarantee uniqueness, but I believe that we can create keys that both
guarantee uniqueness and convey some meaning to humans. Consider that
this key will be embedded in wiki articles any time a source is cited.
It's important that it make some sense.
Oh, I didn#t mean we should use hashes or IDs as keys or identifiers in the URL.
I mean we can employ the hashing technique to detect dupes. Because you will
inadvertably get information about the same thing under two different keys,
because of issues with translitteration, etc.