Re: Problems and Opportunities at purl.org

David and all, hello.

On 10 Nov 2015, at 21:33, David Wood wrote:

> Purl.org <http://purl.org/> has a user interface :) It is not grand 
> (Brian and I created it in a rush), but it does allow library users to 
> create accounts, create and modify their PURLs, search for PURLs, see 
> basic history information, validate PURL targets. They can also 
> request the creation of “domains” (paths) that administrators can 
> approve or deny. Admins can also manage users and groups.

It's an obvious point, but just so it's part of the conversation I'll 
point out that a neo-purl.org interface wouldn't have to do everything 
that the old one did.  Since I'd _guess_ that the comfortable majority 
of purl.org URLs were of one or two redirecting types (I'd be fascinated 
to be proved wrong), an initial version of a replacement could be 
extremely limited and still be valuable, if only to verify that the 
replacement organisation was as functional as we all hope.

I'd guess that the truly genuinely necessary functionality would be:

   * maintain current purl.org redirects (even if some of the odder ones 
have to be done by one-off hand-hacking);

   * allow registration of new 307 redirects (and possibly 303, but 
because it's RTTD rather then necessarily widespread);

   * allow reservation of new 'domains';

...and nothing else in version 1.

David, you also said:

> but we would need to migrate the existing w3id.org <http://w3id.org/> 
> PURLs forward, I think.

In the same spirit, is that _really_ the case?

Speaking for myself, I've no particular commitment to the three or four 
w3id entries I've added, since they were partly experiments, and partly 
for the gesture.  The same might possibly be true for a good fraction of 
the other entries.  Even where folk do have a commitment to their 
redirects, the very oldest entries are 2.5 years old, and many much 
younger, so we're not talking about a vast depth of deployment.

I wouldn't want to suggest a threshold number, but if fewer than N folk 
really care about their entries, is there a case for saying, *shrug*, 
this is another bit of the web that's got a bit broken, but the payoff 
is a new purl.org, _faster_.  If so, then the sooner this is decided the 
better, since it's clear that the rate of new entries is increasing 
beyond the point where this would be a reasonable option.

All the best,

Norman


-- 
Norman Gray  :  https://nxg.me.uk
SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK

Received on Tuesday, 10 November 2015 22:40:48 UTC