Project information
Motivation and founders
ODP wwhen founded as Gnuhoo by Rich Skrenta and Bob Truel in 1998. At a instance, Skrenta & Truel were working when engineers for Sun Microsystems. Chris Tolles, world health organization worked at Sun Microsystems when a head of marketing for network security products, likewise sign around 1998 as a co-founder of Gnuhoo along by owning co-founders Bryn Dole and Jeremy Wenokur. Skrenta was already easily known for his role inside getting TASS, an ancestor of TIN, the popular threaded Usenet newsreader for Unix systems. Coincidentally, a original category structure of the Gnuhoo directory was depending loosely on the structure of Usenet newsgroups so around being.

Gnuhoo to Newhoo to the Open Directory Project
A Gnuhoo directory went hold up June 5, 1998, and was renamed Newhoo when the Slashdot article was posted within which posters claimed that Gnuhoo experienced nothing in park using a spirit of free software for which the GNU project was known and was only the commercial enterprise looking for to construct an choice to Yahoo! using volunteer labor.[http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=98/06/23/0849239] Newhoo became ODP after it was acquired by Netscape Communications Corporation in October 1998 and the content was released under an open content license. Netscape was acquired by AOL shortly thereafter, & ODP was one of a plus involved in the acquisition. AOL late merged sustaining Time-Warner.

Directory growth and maturation
Per instance Netscape assumed stewardship, a Open Directory Design got all about 100,000 URLs indexed with contributions from either astir 4500 editors. In October 5, 1999, the total of Web sites indexed by ODP reached a single million. Based on data from an unofficial estimate, a total of Web sites in a Open Directory surpassed the total of Web sites in the Yahoo! directory in April 2000 with about I.6 million Web sites. ODP achieved a milestone of indexing 2 milliin Web sites on August 14, 2000, and a milestone of 3 milliin list was reached on November 18, 2001. When of July 2005, ODP had astir Four.6 million list organized into on top 580,000 categories from either a contributions of occasionally 69,000 editors. A total of active editor even accounts (that is, victims editor logins which got non been flushed, voluntarily resigned, or timed out imputable inactivity of iv months) hovers between about 9,000 & 10,000.

Competing and spinoff projects
ODP has inspired a formation of ii more major web directories edited by volunteers and sponsored by public companies: The nowadays defunct Go directory (formerly owned by The Walt Disney Company), and Zeal (acquired by LookSmart). Yet, neither one web directories has licensed their content for open content distribution, a strategy which ensured ODP's profits inside the extremely competitory market. the construct of applying a big-shell community of editors to compile low content has been with success applied to more types of projects like Wikipedia.

3 open contented volunteer projects use at times been inspired by ODP's editing model: an open contented eating place directory called ChefMoz (launched by ODP management), an open content music directory called MusicMoz, and an encyclopaedia called Open Site. All a same, none of the triplet keep close at hand however achieved profits at the level of ODP.

ODP content
Organization and scope of content
ODP utilizes the beatification ontology scheme for organizing site list. List in the similar topic come grouped into categories, which could so include little categories.

Gnuhoo borrowed its initial ontology from either Usenet. For instance, a topic covered per comprehensive.ai.alife newsgroup was represented per category Computers/AI/Artificial_Life. A original divisions were for Adult, Arts, Business, Computers, Games, Health, Page, News, Recreation, Information, Regional, Science, Concidering, Society, & Sports. When these xv top-level categories keep close at h& remained intact, the ontology of 2nd- and lower-level categories has undergone a gradual evolution; important changes come initiated by discussion among editors, then implemented once consensus has been reached.

Around July 1998, the directory became multilingual with the addition of the Globe top-level category. A remainder of the directory lists exclusively English language web sites. By May 2005, seventy-five languages were represented. A rate of growth of a non-English components of a directory has been greater than the English component since 2002. When a English component of the directory held about 75% of the web sites inside 2003, the World level grew to over Ace.Five million web sites when of Could 2005, forming about a single third of the directory. Ontology inside non-English categories usually mirrors that of the English directory, although exceptions which reflect language differences come quite most common.

Many of the top-level categories own unique characteristics. A Full-grown category is non present on the directory home page, however these are fully available in the RDF deposit that ODP will bring. When a bulk of a directory is categorized primarily by topic, the Regional category is categorized primarily by area. This hwhen led several to look at ODP as ii parallel directories: Regional & Topical.

In November 14, 2000, a favorite directory in a Open Directory was created for humans under Xviii years aged. Key factors distinguishing this "Kids and Teens" [http://dmoz.org/Kids_and_Teens/] region from either a independent directory come: Nonindulgent guidelines which restrict a list of web sites to population which are then targeted or even appropriate for people under Eighteen years aged.[http://dmoz.org/guidelines/kguidelines/] Category list also when places descriptions apply vocabulary which is age appropriate. Age tags onEvery list distinguish content appropriate for children (age Dozen & under), teens (13 to 15 years old) & matured teens (16 to 18 years old). Children & Teens content is available as a separate RDF dump out. Redaction permissions come such that a community is parallel thereto of the Open Directory.

By Might 2005, this part of the Open Directory involved all over 32,000 places list.

Directory maintenance
Directory list come maintained by editors. When occasionally editors focus in a addition of fresh list, others focus on maintaining the existent list. This includes tasks like a redaction of single list to correcting spelling and/or grammatical errors, too when monitoring a status of joined web sites. However others last across places submissions to dislodge spam & duplicate submissions.

Robozilla is a web crawler written to check a status of a lot web sites enrolled around ODP. Sporadically, Robozilla might flag web web sites which come out to use at times moved or even disappeared, & editors watch as much as prevent a sites & choose action. This run is critical for a directory around strain to achieve one of its founding goals: to reduce the link rot in web directories. Shortly fallowing every dog a web sites marked by using errors come automatically moved to the unreviewed queue in which editors could investigate the children once period permits.

Imputable the popularity of the Open Directory & its sequent impact in search engine rankings, domains with nonchurchgoing registratiin that come employed on ODP own attracted domain hijacking, an issue that has been addressed by regularly removing expired domains from a directory.

When corporate funding & staff for the ODP use diminished around recent years, volunteerism has resulted in the creation of recently & improved redaction information, like linkcheckers to supplement Robozillthe, category crawlers, spellcheckers, seek information that directly sift a recent RDF dump out, bookmarklets to help automate some editing functions, & information to help run through unreviewed queues around multiple ways.

License and requirements
ODP information is mass produced available for open contented distribution under a terms of the Open Directory License, which requires a specific ODP attributiin table on each Webpage that utilizes the information. Notwithstanding a attribution requirement is typically ignored by users of ODP information, & a enforceability of the terms of the ODP license has been challenged by a few ODP information users. Such failure to attach to a terms of a license generates much of ill might among the community of volunteer ODP editors.

RDF dumps
ODP information is processed available across an RDF-like deposit that is published in the dedicated download server [http://rdf.dmoz.org/]. An archive of last versions is as well available [http://rdf.dmoz.org/rdf/archive/]. Newly versions come normally generated hebdomadally. An ODP editor has catalogued a total of bugs that are/were found whenever implementing the ODP RDF deposit, including UTF-8 encoding errors (fixed since August 2004) and a RDF format that doesn't comply using a final RDF specification because ODP RDF generation was implemented prior to the RDF specification was finalized [http://rainwaterreptileranch.org/steve/sw/odp/rdflist.html].

Then when in todays world a thus-supposed RDF deposit is valid XML, it is non strictly RDF, however an ODP-specific format. Software program to run a ODP RDF deposit needs to choose account of this.

Character encoding

Since early 2004 the whole site has been around UTF-8 encoding. Before this, a encryption utilized to exist as ISO 8859-1 for English language categories, and the language-dependent character placed for more languages. A RDF dumps stand been encoded around UTF-8 since early 2000.

Users of ODP content

ODP information powers a core directory services for many of the Web's big lookup engines & portals, including Netscape Search, AOL Search, Google, Alexa and AltaVista.

More utilizes come too mass produced of ODP information. E.g., in the spring of 2004 Overture announced a look for service for third parties combining Yahoo! search results by owning ODP titles, descriptions & category metadata. A seek engine Gigablast announced on 12 May 2005 its searchable copy of the Open Directory. A technology permits research of websites enrolled inside specific categories, "in effect, instantly creating over 500,000 vertical search engines".[http://www.gigablast.com/prdir.html]

As of May 29, 2005 the ODP listed 341 English-language Internet site that utilise ODP information too when 175 web sites inside more languages.[http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Searching/Directories/Open_Directory_Project/Sites_Using_ODP_Data/] Nevertheless these numbers don't reflect a fully picture of apply, when victims web sites which have ODP information forgoing charted a terms of the ODP license are non employed.

Several replication of the ODP come applying obsolete information. A few little web sites stopped applying RDF dumps when it grew progressively big, finding to query survive information directly from either a ODP site.

ODP policies and procedures
Becoming an editor
There are restrictions imposed in world health organization might get an ODP editor. a primary gatekeeping mechanism is an editor application run wherein editor candidates demonstrate their editing abilities, disclose affiliations that can pose a conflict of interest, & otherwise give a feel of how else the applier would in all likelihood mesh by owning the ODP culture & mission. The majority of applications come rejected, however reapplying is allowed & another time bucked up.

Editing model
ODP's editing model occurs as beatification of these. Upon becoming an editor, an single might typically stand redaction permissions around sole the little category. Another time it use at times demonstrated basic redaction skill withwitharound compliance by having the Redaction Guidelines, it is welcome to use for even extrthe redaction privileges, in either a wide category, or in a category elsewhere in the directory. Mentorship relationships between editors come encouraged, & internal forums provide the vehicle for newly editors to ask questions.

Across period, senior editors can be granted extra privileges which reflect their redaction own household budget & leadership inside a editing community. A virtually all straightforward come editall privileges, which allow an editor to access tons categories in the directory. Meta privileges in addition allow editors to perform tasks like reviewing editor applications, setting category features, & treating external & internal abuse reports. Cateditall privileges come similar to editall, but only for one directory category. Likewise, catmod privileges come similar to meta, but only for one directory category. Catmv privileges allow editors to produce changes to directory ontology by moving or even renaming categories. Completely one privileges come granted by staff, normally fallowing discussion by having meta editors.

Inside August 2004, a newly level of privileges known as admin was introduced. Administrator status was granted to the total of hanker serving metas by staff. Administrators use at times a ability to grant editall+ privileges to more editors & to approve newly directory-wide policies, authorities that experienced antecedently single been available to root (staff) editors. The fully listings of senior editors is publicly available. [http://dmoz.org/edoc/editall.html]

Editing guidelines
Altogether ODP editors come potential to abide by ODP's Redaction Guidelines.[http://dmoz.org/guidelines/] These guidelines describecome redaction fundamentals: what types of web web sites can exist as employed & which might not; how else places list should be titled & described around a loosely uniform manner; conventions for even the appellative & building of categories; conflict of interest limitations on the redaction of sites which the editor could have or otherwise be affiliated sustaining; & a code of conduct in the community. Editors world health organization come observed to develop violated these guidelines can be contacted by staff or even even senior editors, use at times their editing permissions cut back, or lose their editing privileges totally. ODP Guidelines come sporadically revised fallowing discussion inside editor forums.

Site submissions
One of a original motivations for forming Gnuhoo/Newhoo/ODP was a frustratiin that numbers of humans had around receiving their web sites enrolled on Yahoo!. Still Yahoo! has since enforced the paid service for apropos consideration of places submissions. That lead has been followed by numerous more directories. A select few assume there are no loose submission the least bit. By direct contrast a ODP has maintained its policy of loose places submissions for completely types of places — a just one of a major general directories to clean sol.

a single effect has been a gradual roc between the ODP & more directories in the balance of content. A earnings-for-inclusion exemplary favours victims a cappella & unforced to pay, and so commercial web sites tend to predominate around directories utilizing it. (View for instance a initial impact in Looksmart. [http://www.searchlounge.org/index.php?p=40]) Whereas a directory manned by volunteers might reflect the aims & interests of victims volunteers. the ODP lists a high proportion of informational & non-non-profit-making web sites.

An additional effect of a loose submission policy is that the ODP has tremendous many submissions. A ODP nowadays has about both million unreviewed submissions, around heavy section due to spam & incorrectly submitted web sites. Then the typical processing instance for a places submission has grown yearn using for each one passing season. All the same a instance taken can't become predicted, since the variation is then low: a submission may exist as filtered inside hours or even require many years.

Controversy and criticism
Allegations of abusive editing practices
There develop hanker been allegations that volunteer ODP editors give favorable professional assistance to their have websites when concomitantly thwarting a straightness efforts of their competition. Such allegations come fielded by ODP's staff & meta editors, world health organization stand a authority to choose corrective action against volunteer editors world health organization come suspected of engaging around abusive redaction practices. Around 2003, ODP introduced a newly Public Abuse Report Patterns that allows members of the general public to report & track allegations of abusive editor conduct utilizing an on the net form. [http://report-abuse.dmoz.org/]

Early in the history of the ODP, its staff gave representatives of selected websites, like Rolling Stone magazine, editing access at ODP in order to names numerous single places in people websites. A utilize of such broker contented providers lapsed & a experiment has non been repeated.

Ownership and management of ODP
Underlying a select few contestation surrounding ODP is its ownership & management. Several of the original GnuHoo volunteers felt that it got been deceived into joining the commercial enterprise. Virtually all of that disputation died down once a design was renamed NewHoo. Furthermore, once Netscape acquired a design, renamed it ODP, & discharged ODP's contented under an open content license, criticism of the ODP almost disappeared. Notwithstanding, when ODP's content became widely utilized by virtually all major search engines and web directories, the issue of ODP's ownership & management resurfaced.

At ODP's origination, there was little thought given to the idea of how else ODP should exist as managed, & there were there is no official forums, guidelines, or FAQs. Around essence, ODP began as a free for all. Potentially when ODP install its internal editor forums, numerous editors remained blissfully unaware that these forums existed until it were directed to the forums by one of their fellow editors. Furthermore, given that ODP experienced there are no official guidelines at the start, ODP editors only talk over a bit of kind of consensus among themselves & published unofficial FAQs.

When instance went in, a ODP Editor Forums became a de facto ODP parliament, & while one of ODP's staffer would post an opinion in the forums, it would become deferred to as an official opinion. (Within more words, "Staff has spoken.") There wwhen as well a short-passing attempt at moderation of the ODP Editor Forums, however it was abandoned as existence the antithesis of the egalitarian principles on which a ODP community was supposed to exist as depending. Notwithstanding, ODP staff began to give sure senior editors extrthe redaction privileges, including a ability to approve recently editor applications, which at length led to a bedded hierarchy of duties & privileges among ODP editors, by owning ODP's paid staff getting a final say on ODP's policies & procedures.

Allegations that ODP editors are removed for criticizing ODP's policies
ODP's paid staff has imposed controversial policies on occasion, & volunteer editors world health organization dissent around ways staff considers rude will buy their editing privileges flushed. 1 alleged lesson of this was chronicled at a XODP Yahoo! eGroup around May of 2000. A earliest known exposé was Life Fallowing a Open Directory Task, the June 1, 2000 guest column written for Traffick.com by David F. Prenatt, Jr. (previous ODP editor "netesq") fallowing losing his ODP editing privileges.[http://www.searchengineguide.com/traffick/story/06-2000-xodp.html] An additional noteworthy lesson was a volunteer editor known per assumed name A Procrastinator, world health organizatiin was banned from either a ODP presently when submitting an article to Slashdot on October 24, 2000, which criticized changes in ODP's copyright policies.[http://slashdot.org/articles/00/10/24/1252232.shtml]

Uninhibited discussion of ODP's putative defect has be additional bromide in mainstream The master of the universe discussion forums.

Editor removal procedures
ODP's editor removal procedures come overseen by ODP's staff & meta editors. Based on data from ODP's official editorial guidelines, editors come flushed for even abusive redaction practices or rude behaviour. Discussions that might effect around render action against volunteer editors choose place inside the personal forum which could simply exist as accessed by ODP's staff & meta editors, & volunteer editors world health organization come existence discussed come non given notice that such redeeming are ingesting place. the few humans call for this arrangement foul, wanting instead the discussion modeled further prefer a test held in the U.S. judiciary.

In the article Editor Removal Explained, ODP Meta Editor Arlarson states that "a great deal of confusion about the removal of editors from ODP results from false or misleading statements by former editors". [http://dmoz.org/newsletter/2000Sep/removal.html]

ODP has a standing policy that prohibits any todays ODP editors within the position to understand anything from either discussing the reasons for specific editor removals. It used to be that, this has led to claims that numbers of ODP editors come left to question how come it can't login at ODP to perform their editing operate. Yet, ODP is nowadays install within such how else that whilst soul tries to login at ODP utilizing the deactivated editor even login, the generic webpage is displayed that informs the flushed editor that the final judgment hwhen been processed on the deactivation of his or her login & providing the listing of conceivable reasons as to how come such a guide will keep close at hand been manufactured. Number of editors
At August 15 2005, the ODP front document stated 69,295 editors. Notwithstanding this is non a total of editors presently contributing to the ODP. These are a total number of editor logins ever created, which includes a several which are then there is no yearn active. ODP staff has on occasion promoted a ODP by mentioning a sum total of editors, forgoing revealing that these are non a total of presently active editors. This can be misleading. A total of active editors tends to range between 9,000 & 10,000.

Size of directory
A todays front website numbers exclude "Test" & "Bookmarks" categories (& web sites within the two). When of July 28, 2005, the RDF held 4,602,933 list & 588,454 categories.

Blacklisting allegations
Senior ODP editors stand a ability to seize "warning" or even "do not list" notes to single domains, however there is no editor has a unilateralist ability to prevent certain web sites from either existence employed. Web sites sustaining these notes can however become used, & at days notes come flushed when a few discussion.

Private Forums
ODP has its have internal forums, a contents of which are then meant just for editors to communicate sustaining both more primarily just about editing topics.

Editor Forum software
A ODP Editor Forums were originally process in software package that was according to a proprietary Ultimate Bulletin Board system. Within June 2003, it switched to the PHPBB formulas. A ODPSearch software program occurs as derivative version of ISearch and is open source, licensed under a Mozilla Public License.

A ODP database/editing computer software is closed source, although Richard Skrenta of ODP did say within June 1998 that he was looking for licensing it under a GNU General Public License. This has led to criticism from either a said Wildebeest design & more advocator of free software, many of whom too criticise a ODP contented license.

When such, there keep close at hand been a select few efforts to provide option to ODP (look at following). These option would allow communities of such as-minded editors to install & maintain their have open source/open content Web directories. But, there is no important open source/open content guide to ODP has emerged.

View likewise: List of web directories