Thanks - three comments:

1. There seems to be a newer tool by the same author: https://github.com/UmbrellaDocs/action-linkspector
2. I am a bit hesitant to add an external Github action to the workflow of such a high-visibility project, as supply-chain attacks and other bad things could happen (if e.g. the external action's repo gets compromised, e.g. introducing spam or malware links to documentation etc.
3. We should not automatically remove links that are "broken", e.g. temporarily return a non-200 HTTP status. E.g. a temporary outage of purl.org should not automatically remove all respective links.

1. There seems to be a newer tool by the same author: https://github.com/UmbrellaDocs/action-linkspector

I saw no tangibile benefit for schema and the old Solution is more lightweight.

2. I am a bit hesitant to add an external Github action to the workflow of such a high-visibility project, as supply-chain attacks and other bad things could happen (if e.g. the external action's repo gets compromised, e.g. introducing spam or malware links to documentation etc.

Yes, i agree, That's Why i'd like to hard fork it into a Schema.org repo and not allow any modifications to schema by the action. I checked the license (permissive MIT) and that would be the road to go.

3. We should not automatically remove links that are "broken", e.g. temporarily return a non-200 HTTP status. E.g. a temporary outage of purl.org should not automatically remove all respective links.

The Runner does not:

• change the Code of the repo

It does solely Outputs a List in the Terminal of the GitHub Action with the broken links

@mfhepp any thoughts?

This pull request is being nudged due to inactivity.

I also don't like having such external dependencies. This could be trivially be added to the python tests.