User:Elper/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Curlie
Cheerful red squirrel logo on a white background
File:Curlie Directory.png
Type of site
Web directory
Available in90 languages, including English
ParentCurlie Project Inc.
URLcurlie.org
CommercialNo
RegistrationOptional
Users91,962
LaunchedAugust 25, 2018; 5 years ago (2018-08-25)
Current statusOpen
Content license
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported, Open Directory License

Curlie is a multilingual open-content directory of World Wide Web links. The site and community who maintained it were formerly known as the Open Directory Project (ODP) and lastly as (DMOZ). It is constructed and maintained by a community of volunteer editors.

Curlie uses a hierarchical ontology scheme for organizing site listings. Listings on a similar topic are grouped into categories which then include smaller categories.

From DMOZ's closure on March 17, 2017 there was significant downtime needed for the volunteers to adapt the software to a new environment until the official launch on the 25th of August 2018. As of November 2018Only the directory's RDF data output still needs to be activated.

History[edit]

For the full history of the directory from 1998 to 2017, please see DMOZ.


Several of the top-level categories have unique characteristics. The Adult category is not present on the directory homepage but it will be fully available in the RDF dump that Curlie will provide. While the bulk of the directory is categorized primarily by topic, the Regional category is categorized primarily by region. This has led many to view Curlie as two parallel directories: Regional and Topical.


Kids and Teens[edit]

A special directory within Curlie was created for people under 18 years of age.[2] Key factors distinguishing this "Kids and Teens" area from the main directory are:

  • stricter guidelines which limit the listing of sites to those which are targeted or "appropriate" for people under 18 years of age;[3]
  • category names as well as site descriptions use vocabulary which is "age appropriate";
  • age tags on each listing distinguish content appropriate for kids (age 12 and under), teens (13 to 15 years old) and mature teens (16 to 18 years old);
  • Kids and Teens content is available as a separate RDF dump;
  • editing permissions are such that the community is parallel to that of Curlie.

As of November 2018, this portion of Curlie included over 29,000 site listings.


Maintenance[edit]

Directory listings are maintained by editors. While some editors focus on the addition of new listings, others focus on maintaining the existing listings and some do both. This includes tasks such as the editing of individual listings to correct spelling and/or grammatical errors, as well as monitoring the status of linked sites. Still others go through site suggestions to remove spam and duplicates.

QC is a Web crawler written to check the status of all sites listed in Curlie. Periodically, it will flag sites which appear to have moved or disappeared and editors follow up to check the sites and take action. This process is critical for the directory in striving to achieve one of its founding goals: to reduce the link rot in web directories. Shortly after each run, the sites marked with errors are automatically moved to the unreviewed pool where editors may investigate them when time permits.

Due to the popularity of the directory and its supposed impact on search engine rankings (See PageRank), domains with lapsed registration that are listed in the directory have attracted domain hijacking, an issue that has been addressed by regularly removing expired domains from the directory.


License and requirements[edit]

DMOZ data was previously made available under the terms of the Open Directory License, which required a specific DMOZ attribution table on every Web page that uses the data.

The Open Directory License also included a requirement that users of the data continually check DMOZ site for updates and discontinue use and distribution of the data or works derived from the data once an update occurs. This restriction prompted the Free Software Foundation to refer to the Open Directory License as a non-free documentation license, citing the right to redistribute a given version not being permanent and the requirement to check for changes to the license.

In 2011, DMOZ silently changed its license to a Creative Commons Attribution license[citation needed], which is a free license (and GPL compatible).[4]

RDF dumps[edit]

DMOZ data is made available through an RDF-like dump that is published on a download server, older versions are also archived there.[5] New versions are usually generated weekly. An DMOZ editor has catalogued a number of bugs that are encountered in the DMOZ RDF dump, most importantly that the file format isn't RDF.[6] So while today the so-called RDF dump is valid XML, it is not valid RDF and as such, software to process the DMOZ RDF dump needs to be specifically written for DMOZ data.

Content users[edit]

DMOZ data powers the core directory services for many of the Web's largest search engines and portals, including Netscape Search, AOL Search, and Alexa. Google Directory used DMOZ information, until being shuttered in July 2011.[7]

Other uses are also made of DMOZ data. For example, in the spring of 2004 Overture announced a search service for third parties combining Yahoo! Directory search results with DMOZ titles, descriptions and category metadata. The search engine Gigablast announced on May 12, 2005 its searchable copy of DMOZ. The technology permits search of websites listed in specific categories, "in effect, instantly creating over 500,000 vertical search engines".[8]

As of 8 September 2006, DMOZ listed 313 English-language Web sites that use DMOZ data as well as 238 sites in other languages.[9] However, these figures do not reflect the full picture of use, as those sites that use DMOZ data without following the terms of the DMOZ license are not listed.

Policies and procedures[edit]

DMOZ was co-founded by Rich Skrenta (depicted in 2009, age 42).

Restrictions are imposed on who can become an DMOZ editor. The primary gatekeeping mechanism is an editor application process wherein editor candidates demonstrate their editing abilities, disclose affiliations that might pose a conflict of interest, and otherwise give a sense of how the applicant would likely mesh with the DMOZ culture and mission.[10] A majority of applications are rejected but reapplying is allowed and sometimes encouraged. The same standards apply to editors of all categories and subcategories.[citation needed]

DMOZ's editing model is a hierarchical one. Upon becoming editors, individuals will generally have editing permissions in only a small category. Once they have demonstrated basic editing skills in compliance with the Editing Guidelines, they are welcome to apply for additional editing privileges in either a broader category or else another category in the directory. Mentorship relationships between editors are encouraged, and internal forums provide a vehicle for new editors to ask questions.[citation needed]

DMOZ has its own internal forums, the contents of which are intended only for editors to communicate with each other primarily about editing topics. Access to the forums requires an editor account and editors are expected to keep the contents of these forums private.[11]

Over time, senior editors can be granted additional privileges which reflect their editing experience and leadership within the editing community. The most straightforward are editall privileges, which allow an editor to access all categories in the directory. Meta privileges additionally allow editors to perform tasks such as reviewing editor applications, setting category features, and handling external and internal abuse reports. Cateditall privileges are similar to editall, but only for a single directory category. Similarly, catmod privileges are similar to meta, but only for a single directory category. Catmv privileges allow editors to make changes to directory ontology by moving or renaming categories. All of these privileges are granted by admins and staff, usually after discussion with meta editors.[citation needed]

In August 2004, a new level of privileges called admin was introduced. Administrator status was granted to a number of long serving metas by staff. Administrators have the ability to grant editall+ privileges to other editors and to approve new directory-wide policies, powers which had previously only been available to root (staff) editors.[12]

All DMOZ editors are expected to abide by DMOZ's Editing Guidelines. These guidelines describe editing basics: which types of sites may be listed and which may not; how site listings should be titled and described in a loosely consistent manner; conventions for the naming and building of categories; conflict of interest limitations on the editing of sites which the editor may own or otherwise be affiliated with; and a code of conduct within the community.[13] Editors who are found to have violated these guidelines may be contacted by staff or senior editors, have their editing permissions cut back, or lose their editing privileges entirely. DMOZ Guidelines are periodically revised after discussion in editor forums.[citation needed]


Ownership and management[edit]

Underlying some controversy surrounding DMOZ is its ownership and management. Some of the original GnuHoo volunteers felt that they had been deceived into joining a commercial enterprise.[14] To varying degrees, those complaints have continued up until the present.

At DMOZ's inception, there was little thought given to the idea of how DMOZ should be managed and there were no official forums, guidelines or FAQs. In essence, DMOZ began as a free for all.[15]

As time went on, the ODP Editor Forums became the de facto DMOZ parliament and when one of DMOZ's staff members would post an opinion in the forums, it would be considered an official ruling.[11] Even so, DMOZ staff began to give trusted senior editors additional editing privileges, including the ability to approve new editor applications, which eventually led to a stratified hierarchy of duties and privileges among DMOZ editors, with DMOZ's paid staff having the final say regarding DMOZ's policies and procedures.[12][16]

Robert Keating, a principal of Touchstone Consulting Group in Washington, D.C. since 2006, has worked as AOL's Program Manager for DMOZ since 2004. He started working for AOL in 1999 as Senior Editor for AOL Search, then as Managing Editor, AOL Search, DMOZ, and then as Media Ecosystem Manager, AOL Product Marketing.[17][18]

Editor removal procedures[edit]

DMOZ's editor removal procedures are overseen by DMOZ's staff and meta editors. According to DMOZ's official editorial guidelines, editors are removed for abusive editing practices or uncivil behaviour. Discussions that may result in disciplinary action against volunteer editors take place in a private forum which can only be accessed by DMOZ's staff and meta editors. Volunteer editors who are being discussed are not given notice that such proceedings are taking place.[16] Some people find this arrangement distasteful, wanting instead a discussion modeled more like a trial held in the U.S. judicial system.[19]

In the article "Editor Removal Explained", DMOZ meta editor Arlarson states that "a great deal of confusion about the removal of editors from DMOZ results from false or misleading statements by former editors".[20]

The DMOZ's confidentiality guidelines prohibit any current DMOZ editors in a position to know anything from discussing the reasons for specific editor removals.[16] However, a generic list of reasons is for example given in the guidelines.[21] In the past, this has led to removed DMOZ editors wondering why they cannot login at DMOZ to perform their editing work.[22][23]


Blacklisting allegations[edit]

Senior Curlie editors have the ability to attach "warning" or "do not list" notes to individual domains but no editor has the unilateral ability to block certain sites from being listed. Sites with these notes might still be listed and at times notes are removed after some discussion.[24]

Hierarchical structure[edit]

Many believe hierarchical directories are too complicated. With the emergence of Web 2.0, folksonomies began to appear, and some editors proposed that folksonomies, networks and directed graphs are more "natural" and easier to manage than hierarchies.[25][26][27]

Software[edit]

The Curlie database/editing software is closed source (although work is ongoing to make it Open Source).

Search[edit]

The ODPSearch feature is based on

Editor forums[edit]

The Curlie Editor Forums are a modified version of phpBB.

Bug tracking[edit]

The bug tracking software used by Curlie is Github.

Interface[edit]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "curlie.org Traffic Statistics". Alexa Internet. Retrieved November 28, 2018.
  2. ^ Kids and Teens Launches! Open Directory Project Newsletter, November/December 2000
  3. ^ "Kids&Teens Guidelines". curlie.org. Retrieved November 27, 2018.
  4. ^ GNU Project: on the Creative Commons Attribution license
  5. ^ "Open Directory RDF Dump". Rdf.dmoz.org. Archived from the original on June 26, 2014. Retrieved June 18, 2014.
  6. ^ "ODP/dmoz Data Dump ToDo List". steevithak.com. Retrieved July 17, 2017.
  7. ^ "Google Streamlining: Say Goodbye to the Google Directory and Labs!". Pandia Search Engine News. July 21, 2011. Retrieved July 25, 2011.
  8. ^ "Gigablast Launches 500,000 Vertical Search Engines". Gigablast. May 12, 2005. Retrieved July 17, 2017.
  9. ^ Category: Sites Using ODP Data on www.dmoz.org. Retrieved September 8, 2006.
  10. ^ "Become an Editor at the Open Directory Project". Dmoz.org. Retrieved June 18, 2014.
  11. ^ a b "ODP Communication Guidelines". Dmoz.org. Retrieved June 18, 2014.
  12. ^ a b "Open Directory Project Administrator Guidelines". Dmoz.org. Retrieved June 18, 2014.
  13. ^ "ODP Directory Editorial Guidelines". Dmoz.org. Retrieved June 18, 2014.
  14. ^ Cite error: The named reference SlashdotGnuhoo was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  15. ^ "The Open Directory Project: The Spirit of the Web". laisha.com. Retrieved July 17, 2017.
  16. ^ a b c "Open Directory Project Meta Guidelines". dmoz.org. December 31, 2013. Archived from the original on March 4, 2017. Retrieved July 21, 2017.
  17. ^ Meet AOL's DMOZ Staff Team Archived January 1, 2012, at the Wayback Machine, DMOZ Blog, January 8, 2009
  18. ^ Robert Keating LinkedIn
  19. ^ Prenatt, David (May 29, 2000). "Life After ODP". Yahoo! Groups. Retrieved July 17, 2017.
  20. ^ Arlarson, Editor Removal Explained, Open Directory Project Newsletter (September 2000).
  21. ^ "Guidelines: Account Removal". dmoz.org. July 3, 2016. Archived from the original on March 17, 2017. Retrieved July 21, 2017.
  22. ^ "Editor account expired". resource-zone.com. July 27, 2004. Retrieved July 17, 2017.
  23. ^ Thread: Can't Login Archived November 28, 2008, at the Wayback Machine on Resource-Zone
  24. ^ Add Note to URL Feature, in Curlie Documentation
  25. ^ Hriţcu, C. (April 8, 2005). "Folksonomies vs. Ontologies". hritcu.wordpress.com. Retrieved July 17, 2017.
  26. ^ "Ontology is Overrated" Archived July 29, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
  27. ^ Hammond, Tony; Hannay, Timo; Lund, Ben; Scott, Joanna (April 2005). "Social Bookmarking Tools (I)". D-Lib Magazine. Retrieved July 17, 2017.

External links[edit]