Interesting that these problems arise even when using the API as Google
intends on the client side.
I would encourage people to tell Google about this. If only we knew a
way to tell Google about it. If you can find a public email address
anywhere or comment form, let us know. And if you are having problems in
production even when using the API client side as intended, let Google
know. Maybe there will be a miracle and they'll care. Chances are higher
here, because it seems like they created this feature in large part for
libraries. If libraries are finding it does not work in production...
Jonathan
Boheemen, Peter van wrote:
Godmar,
It did not shut down during development, yesterday, when I developed it from
home. It broke down today, when people started to use it. All university
desktop computer have got dynamic 10.*.*.* adresses. The gateway does NAT so
they are exposed to google with about three possible IP adresses. Or, if they
use SFX, the IP adress of the Open URL resolver, or in the case of citrix, the
IP adress of that machine. Anyway, all these approaches suffer from the same
problem with Google's policy.
Besides all that, I prefer a clean XML interface like Amazon provides above the
JSON approach of Google.
And I do prefer server side handling, since I got control over what the user is
presented and I do not have problems with javascript support of the specific
browser that the user is equiped with.
Peter
Drs. P.J.C. van Boheemen
Hoofd Applicatieontwikkeling en beheer - Bibliotheek Wageningen UR
Head of Application Development and Management - Wageningen University and
Research Library
tel. +31 317 48 25 17
http://library.wur.nl <http://library.wur.nl/>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
________________________________
Van: Code for Libraries namens Godmar Back
Verzonden: ma 17-3-2008 16:21
Aan: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Onderwerp: Re: [CODE4LIB] Free covers from Google
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Tim Spalding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
limits. I don't think it's a strict hits-per-day, I think it's heuristic
> software meant to stop exactly what we'd be trying to do, server-side
> machine-based access.
Aren't we still talking about covers? I see *no* reason to go
server-side on that. Browser-side gets you what you want-covers from
Google-without the risk they'll shut you down over overuse.
But Peter's experience says otherwise, no?
His computer was shut down during development - I don't see how Google
would tell his use from the use of someone doing research using a
library catalog. Especially if NAT is used with a substantial number
of users as in Giles's use case.
- Godmar
--
Jonathan Rochkind
Digital Services Software Engineer
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
410.516.8886
rochkind (at) jhu.edu
