Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

Just one more comment: such a list could be useful if it's published by 
a well identified person or group who can be contacted in case of 
disagreement or to get off the list.

Le 23/06/2011 08:27, Antoine Zimmermann a écrit :
> Le 22/06/2011 23:49, Richard Cyganiak a écrit :
>> On 21 Jun 2011, at 10:44, Martin Hepp wrote:
>>> PS: I will not release the IP ranges from which the trouble
>>> originated, but rest assured, there were top research institutions
>>> among them.
>> The right answer is: name and shame. That is the way to teach them.
>> Like Karl said, we should collect information about abusive crawlers
>> so that site operators can defend themselves. It won't be *that* hard
>> to research and collect the IP ranges of offending universities.
>> I started a list here:
> What's the use of this list?
> Assume it stays empty, as you hope. What's the use?
> Assume it gets filled with names: so what? It does not prove these
> crawlers are bad. The authors of the crawlers can just remove themselves
> from the list. If a crawler is on the list, chances are that nobody
> would notice anyway, especially not the kind of people that Martin is
> defending in his email. If a crawler is put to the list because it is
> bad and measures are taken, what happens when the crawler get fixed and
> become polite? And what if measures are taken while the crawler was not
> bad at all to start with?
> Surely, this list is utterly useless.
> Maybe you can keep the page to describe what are the problems that bad
> crawlers create and what are the measures that publishers can take to
> overcome problematic situation.
> AZ
>> The list is currently empty. I hope it stays that way.
>> Thank you all, Richard

Received on Thursday, 23 June 2011 07:02:28 UTC