I'm more interested in using this bang repository in my own project more than in governing how bangs are added/updated (on Kagi), but I'll share my thoughts:
Right now, I am using bang data from DuckDuckGo for my own project (https://webapps.stackexchange.com/a/162253/1530). I understand it's a little old and things may be broken, but it's better than nothing. I have already made great progress in analyzing all the bangs, merging duplicates, etc.
I heard Kagi had fixed a lot of bangs and modified them to work with Kagi (vs DuckDuckgo). If I had access to these bangs, it would save me a lot of effort since I also want my project to work with Kagi. (My project provides a bang search interface like https://duckduckgo.com/bangs or https://search.brave.com/bangs. But better ^__^. It actually fulfills a lot of open suggestions in this feedback forum.)
In turn, Kagi might find the work I've done massaging DuckDuckGo's bang.js data file useful for their own purposes. And they might even be able to use my project for their own kagi.com/bangs page.
So my opinion is a little biased, but I say just release the data. What's the worst that can happen?
- Maybe a flood of github issues requesting new bangs and fixes to existing ones
- But Kagi is not obligated to apply changes to the open-source repository to their own search engine
- Kagi is not even obligated to respond to any of the issues
- Maybe the worst that can happen is Kagi kills any momentum in growing a community to support this bang repository.
- But I think waiting for guidelines kills just as much momentum.
On the other hand:
- I think the guidelines are overengineering for problems that likely won't happen. (There won't be a flood of github issues asking for new bangs.)
- If people do submit issues/pull requests on github, it will give a better idea of what type of guidelines are actually needed. Solve problems that actually exist.
- Community members other than Kagi might step up and start maintaining the bang repository. No requirement for Kagi to do it themselves.
It seems one of the main issues the guidelines are supposed to address is akin to problems with domain names like squatting and determining who gets the "valuable" ones. I don't see this as a real problem (until the non-techy majority starts using bangs to navigate the web like domain names.) In addition, Kagi (and my project) allow over-riding bang triggers if you don't like Kagi's default bangs.
Here is a suggestion Kagi can use for managing bangs on their site:
- Allow anyone to register a bang that doesn't exist yet. (Like NPM modules)
- The bang can be used right away, but it is "hidden" until it passes moderation.
- Moderation can be done manually by an admin, or a voting system like this feedback forum.
- If the bang is found not useful/against the rules/etc the bang is immediately retired.
- After passing moderation, the bang can be found via autocomplete/search/etc.
- If bang usage dips below a certain threshold, it is automatically retired so someone else may register a new URL.
- The bang creator can retire their own bangs. Updates are more questionable...
- Perhaps there is some moderation/voting mechanism to update/delete existing bangs.