LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  January 2011

CODE4LIB January 2011

Subject:

Re: to link or not to link: PURLs

From:

Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 27 Jan 2011 10:23:48 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (167 lines)

"If the best you can do is an external Handle/PURL set-up, then it is better than nothing."

I would say that it's SOMETIMES better than nothing. It depends on what you're doing, what your requirements and goals are. Not every application needs long-term persistence of URLs -- whether through an 'abstraction layer' or not. ('abstraction layer' is just an implementation detail to get long-term persistence of URLs accross systems changes, right?  You don't always need something called an 'abstraction layer' to do that).  Almost every application does need bookmarkable URLs for the short/medium-term though.  If you're sacrificing short-term bookmarkable URLs for long-term-goal persistent but confusing/non-transparent/not-discoverable URLs, that may or may not be a good trade off. 

________________________________________
From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Shearer, Timothy J [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:03 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] to link or not to link: PURLs

Thanks Peter (and everyone), that's what I was fishing for.  We haven't
yet gone there, and this whole conversation has been very helpful.

-t

On 1/26/11 6:48 PM, "Peter Murray" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>So that will teach me to post a moderately controversial opinion, then
>leave to take the kids out for a pizza dinner.
>
>I agree with what has been said so far, an in particular with Jonathan's
>latest e-mail below.  Abstraction layers are good.  Hiding abstraction
>layers from users is even better.  If the best you can do is an external
>Handle/PURL set-up, then it is better than nothing.  If you have some
>control and institutional commitment to a URL space -- creating "cool
>URIs" [1] to your content, if you will -- then by all means do that.  If
>you can also attempt to future-proof your URL space with something like
>ARKs [2], then I think it is the best of all worlds.
>
>[1] http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI
>[2] https://confluence.ucop.edu/display/Curation/ARK
>
>
>Peter
>
>On Jan 26, 2011, at 6:23 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
>>
>> What some in this thread are frowning on is having an "abstraction
>>layer" such that the persistent URL for your web page or resource is not
>>the URL that typical users see in their browser location bar when
>>viewing that resource or web page.
>>
>> If your abstraction layer can make that so, then I don't think anyone
>>in this thread would frown upon it.
>>
>> If your abstraction layer can't make that so... then I personally still
>>agree it's sometimes an appropriate solution, the best trade-off, an
>>acceptable evil.
>>
>> But it's worth spending some time thinking about if you can set it up
>>to do that instead.
>>
>> Some shops have more technical capacity than others. If you are at a
>>shop that can't even do their own apache install, then you are pretty
>>much at the bottom of 'technical capacity' (which isn't an insult,
>>that's where some people are),  there isn't much of anything you can do,
>>and you should be telling your vendors that you want them to provide you
>>with software that does it right.  That's pretty much all you can do.
>>But STILL requires you to have enough understanding to tell the vendor
>>what 'right' is and know if they've done it or not. If you can't even do
>>that... well, you'll get what you get, so it goes.
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>>Shearer, Timothy J [[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 5:45 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] to link or not to link: PURLs
>>
>> Right, they are not the same, which is why I wondered if there was
>> opposition to an abstraction layer in principle.
>>
>> A major problem for institutions who cannot afford to build is that they
>> license systems.  Licensed systems are often less than ideal.
>>
>> When an institution is in that scenario it either doesn't have the
>> resources to tweak the system or the system is so closed as to be
>> un-tweakable (or both).
>>
>> So your options, unless I'm missing something, are to stick with the bad
>> urls your system provides, or to invest in an abstraction layer.
>>
>> I realize that the abstraction layer doesn't solve many of the problems
>> (SEO, harvested indexes, user's re-use from the object they are looking
>> at), but it does seem to solve some problems.  Published urls (say in
>> Worldcat, Open Library, and elsewhere).  Taking advantage of linked data
>> locally when you do have resources (e.g, an enhancing interface that
>> extends functionality, or a preservation layer where a persistent
>> identifier in the form of links would be handy).
>>
>> mod_rewrite assumes Apache, and that you may configure it.
>>
>> So I'm wondering if an abstraction layer is frowned upon in principle
>>(as
>> opposed to specific dislike or PURLS or handles).
>>
>> And, even if it's not ideal, whether it still presents utility, even in
>> less than ideal implementations.
>>
>> -t
>>
>>
>> On 1/26/11 5:09 PM, "Robert Forkel" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> as far as i can see, dislike of handles and PURLs doesn't mean
>>> commitment to one system which will work in perpetuity, but only
>>> commitment to own one domain in perpetuity. once you commit to that
>>> you may create an abstraction/redirection layer with mod_rewrite :)
>>> regards,
>>> robert
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Shearer, Timothy J
>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>> Peter, are you opposed to an abstraction layer in principle?  My
>>>>reading
>>>> of your response is that there's an assumption that there is one
>>>> "system"
>>>> and that it will work in perpetuity.  We are in the unfortunate but I
>>>> think fairly common position of having multiple systems, of aspiring
>>>>to
>>>> pare that down, and fully expectant that we'll need to migrate at some
>>>> point even if we find perfection in the near to mid term.  Having a
>>>>link
>>>> abstraction layer would make those transitions easier on our users,
>>>>and
>>>> on
>>>> the world of linked data in general.
>>>>
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/26/11 4:51 PM, "Peter Murray" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 26, 2011, at 3:24 PM, Erik Hetzner wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:57:42 -0600,
>>>>>> Pottinger, Hardy J. wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi, this topic has come up for discussion with some of my
>>>>>>> colleagues, and I was hoping to get a few other perspectives. For a
>>>>>>> public interface to a repository and/or digital library, would you
>>>>>>> make the handle/PURL an active hyperlink, or just provide the URL
>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>> text form? And why?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My feeling is, making the URL an active hyperlink implies
>>>>>>>confidence
>>>>>>> in the PURL/Handle, and provides the user with functionality they
>>>>>>> expect of a hyperlink (right or option-click to copy, or bookmark).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A permanent URL should be displayed in the address bar of the user零
>>>>>> browser. Then, when users do what they are going to do anyway
>>>>>>(select
>>>>>> the link in the address bar & copy it), it will work.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...which is why I intensely dislike Handles and PURLs.  Man-up
>>>>> (person-up? byte-up?) and make a long-term commitment to own the URLs
>>>>> you
>>>>> mint with your digital asset management system.
>
>--
>Peter Murray         [log in to unmask]        tel:+1-678-235-2955
>
>Ass't Director, Technology Services Development   http://dltj.org/about/
>Lyrasis   --    Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.
>The Disruptive Library Technology Jester                http://dltj.org/
>Attrib-Noncomm-Share   http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager