One of these system is SWHIDs. I find it completely unconvincing the claim that SWHIDs are “too early in their development and deployment”.
@TAC_NISO If your working group has this sense, you have a problem with how you are forming a working group to make recommendations about PIDs for software. If your working group can not make credible recommendations why should the public heed these recommendations, consider it a relevant standard, or care what NISO publishes?
I say this as a contributor to a research software package, widely used in population genetics, that has a SWHID and not a DOI to the underlying software code. We use DOIs to identify papers talking about the software and for credit in academia. SWHIDs identify the software code. I don’t claim all researches should take the approach we took, but it is very much the approach of the real research software code that I worked on. And this has been the case for more than two years.