Re: [semanticweb] Purl.org offline?

Alan Ruttenberg said the following on 2008-10-15 16:03:
> 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.
This is possible only if a special purl-uri scheme is used, if the uri
of the term is an http-uri and something went wrong with the domain
renewal, semantic web agents would consider the triples of the
casino-site as autoritative about the terms.
> 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.
looking forward to it.

reto
>
> -Alan
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür
> <reto.bachmann@trialox.org <mailto: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 20:08:15 UTC