Reviewer has chosen to be AnonymousOverall Impression:
AcceptTechnical Quality of the paper:
Limited noveltyData availability:
All used and produced data (if any) are FAIR and openly available in established data repositoriesLength of the manuscript:
The length of this manuscript is about right
Summary of paper in a few sentences:
The authors provide a very interesting 'historical' perspective piece based on the unforeseen collapse of the OCLC system, and the steps taken to address this sudden gap. They describe their simple and low cost, low maintenance burden solution in some detail. This efficient and simple to use (by adopters) system is based on github and htacess files, and populated through simple YAML files, with appropriate testing/validation throughout the deployment process.
Reasons to accept:
Describes a very popular identifier/resolution system extensively used through the ontological community (OBO). This has significant usage, and would be very useful to developers and actually to end users who wish to learn more. It also provides a historical record on what happened previously when such a system failed, and provides sufficient technical detail to newcomers.
Reasons to reject:
Largely miscellaneous comments/suggestions.
It would be nice to round out this information on what happened to the previously hosted information on purl.org & internet archive. One would imagine that some of the unclaimed purls must have been lost? Were the redirection targets captured for example, even when no longer resolvable? Such information could be useful to may to 'live' targets currently used by the new obo purls.
w3id.org.org system typo
3 types of redirect cases are stated. It would be nice to add a concrete example for each if possible..I appreciate there is more information in the 'Testing and deployment' & 'Custom configuration' sections. Could alternatively direct reader to those sections and provide there.
- if possible, it would be interesting to know the total number of 'term browsers' that are used to cover obo ontologies
testing and deployment
- couple of spaces after commas in a few locations
- to automated the -> to automate the
- If all test pass -> If all tests pass
- Is any more information on the 4xx errors available?
Load balancing and backup/redundancy have been considered. Any thought to moving to entirely cloud-based solutions?
Web-based YAML editor sounds perfect.