Re: [semanticweb] Purl.org offline?

Peer-to-peer networks deal with this problem (and others) quite effectively.

(Michael Hausenblas pointed this out to me.)

On 15/10/2008 15:03, "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> wrote:

> I believe that the model we should look to is the linux distribution system.
> There are a number of mirrors each of which are coequal. On can explicitly
> choose which site to use or have on randomly assigned. In a federation of
> PURLs one site turned casino would be quickly removed from the list. I think
> this is quite feasible to accomplish for PURL servers, have discussed this
> with the developers, and hope to see a prototype some time in the near future.
>
> -Alan
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür
> <reto.bachmann@trialox.org> wrote:
>>
>> carmen r said the following on 2008-10-14 15:28:
>>> On Tue Oct 14, 2008 at 12:39:54AM +0100, Giovanni Tummarello wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Martin, all, yes,  it is a service that was planned,
>>>>
>>>> unfortunately the cache system we have is based on HBase, which is
>>>> still in a very early stage and badly crashed on us recently. We're in
>>>> the process of updating, restoring it etc.
>>>> It will take some time but it is coming, will announce it when ready.
>>>> (probably together with a simple library for transparent fallover)
>>>>
>>>> So a semantic web client could simply do an HTTP on the URL and if
>>>> fails switch back to Sindice or whoever else wants to do that.
>>>>
>>>> I agree this service is badly needed. I dont think Semantic Web can be
>>>> that interesting if a client doesnt mash or chains together several
>>>> resources automatically, with the consequent dramatic chances of
>>>> failure, thus the need for one or more backup servers.. (which however
>>>>
>>>
>>> i think its fundamental enough a need to warrant architectural consideration
>>>
>>> i mean on the level of HTTP.
>>>
>>> not saying HTTP should go away. probably some bblfish way of doing it
>>> without inventing a new protocol (heck, Bittorrent still uses HTTP for
>>> parts)
>>>
>>>
>> If purl comes back up we are lucky, but maybe we could learn something
>> anyway.
>>
>> Having names for fundamental terms based on the DNS system is a
>> weakness. What will we do if purl.org <http://purl.org>  gets taken over by a
>> casino site?
>> Will we argue that the terms keep their meaning even if the casino site
>> says something else? In my scifi post[1] I've scheduled this topic for
>> 2015. Using hash-uri or other non-http uris have advantage of stability,
>> but it's harder to look up the meaning, could we combine the approaches?
>> should we have protocol independents terms with evolving meaning as in
>> natural languages?
>>
>>> we need alternatives to the Google "we are your backup server" system
>>>
>> indeed.
>>
>> reto
>>
>> 1. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2008Jan/0118.html
>>
>>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2008 14:20:29 UTC