> No precise deadline, but I intend to put it up by the end of the week.
> Good to know that go.scheme.org exists, I hadn't noticed it before.

You may prefer linking to https://conservatory.scheme.org/readscheme/

Or we can prominently link from https://research.scheme.org/ to
https://conservatory.scheme.org/readscheme/ as an interim measure.

>> IMHO research.scheme.org is not currently in a presentable condition.
>> If you'd like to improve it, that would be great.
>
> I should have capacity to help with this over the coming weeks/months,
> but need to hit a milestone or two first.

Sounds great! A few people involved in Scheme academia are probably
still around to help. (And a few Racketeers still have an interest in
the wider Scheme community.)

>> I started converting the Markdown into S-expressions, making quite a
>> lot of progress. IIRC
>> https://github.com/schemedoc/bibliography/blob/master/page9.scm is a
>> complete conversion of "page9.md". Nevertheless, most of the .md files
>> still have not been converted.
>>
>> https://scholar.google.com/ is an indispensable resource.
>> https://github.com/schemedoc/bibliography/blob/master/tools/bibtex2lose.scm can parse the BibTeX citations from Google Scholar and convert to S-expressions.
>>
>> If you'd like to continue this conversion work, I can "match your
>> contribution" as some companies say about donations. Meaning if you
>> convert 10 papers, I will convert another 10.
>>
>> If it's too much effort for you to add the abstracts of the papers, we
>> can skip that.
>
> OK, I'll start here when I get around to this.  Perhaps some Google
> Scholar scraping could be automated, eg.
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62938110/does-google-scholar-have-an-api-available-that-we-can-use-in-our-research-applic

Thanks. I read the linked Stack Overflow answer (which recommends an
unofficial Python tool called "scholarly), but it seems it would not be
a faster process than what we have now. Getting the right paper from
Google Scholar search results cannot be automated. Human judgment is needed.

However, I just scraped the entire Readscheme site and noticed files
like this:
https://web.archive.org/web/20061209174645/http://library.readscheme.org/servlets/cite.ss?pattern=PLT-TR-94-238

Those could be much faster than Scholar since the right paper has been
preselected.

>> The only hidden gems you've missed are the homepages of prominent
>> Scheme scholars. E.g. Queinnec, Feeley, and Dybvig have archived a lot
>> of their own stuff themselves. https://legacy.cs.indiana.edu/ is useful.
>
> Ah, good point, thanks.  It might be worth collecting some links to
> these, I have come across similar collections by Rees, Kelsey, Shivers,
> Sperber, and there's surely many more.  We might as well embrace the
> fact that web directories were the correct solution all along.

Scheme.org (and Prescheme.org, I presume) are kind of predicated on the
idea that web directories are a lackluster experience :)

Scheme websites tend to be dispersed, incomplete, inconsistent, and out
of date. I hope to help fix that.

It would still be useful to compile a list of schemers' homepages,
though. Or why not Scheme websites in general.

> Fair enough!  Once the data is all together, there will be a nice
> opportunity for something like index.scheme.org to be built on top, too.

Indeed. One dataset, many user interfaces.

We've compiled several (currently incomplete) datasets at the GitHub
organization https://github.com/schemedoc. That organization actually
predates the present effort to bring Scheme.org to life.

Scheme.org and schemedoc content has been mixed up pretty haphazardly
until now, but it would probably be best to have a clean separation
where schemedoc contains only source data (S-expressions, etc.) and
schemeorg repos only HTML generation and server logic.