[00:25] http://db48x.net/pixorial.urls.2014-06-26.sorted.bz2 [06:58] Are WARC archives meant to preserve Javascript? As increasingly pages on the web rely on JS for their content, and the pages using JS I've seen archived on IA are mostly broken. [07:00] Here's for example a brilliant piece I just saw on HN which when saved on IA lacks the core JS animations that make up half the content: http://wayback.archive.org/web/20140627065355/http://bost.ocks.org/mike/algorithms/ [07:15] Spring: WARC files save the exact contents of any HTTP request the caller makes, and the exact response returned by the server [07:16] if the crawler doesn't know to request a particular file, then the WARC won't have anything about it [07:16] even if the crawler runs all of the javascript in the page, anything that requires user interaction to trigger an HTTP request will likely be missed [07:21] Doesn't this become an issue for archivists wanting to preserve such pages? [07:23] I mean obviously it would the ideal, but as more and more of the web uses JS for things I had imagined something would be created to handle archiving pages/sites more like the user would have viewed them. [07:36] yes, it's a growing problem [07:37] in many ways the ideal archival method would be to record the traffic of real users interacting with the site in an everyday manner [07:37] it's not particularly fast or methodical though [07:41] great page btw, [07:44] I'm not quite sure what's causing the error, but none of the files are missing [19:42] SketchCow: you around by any chance? [19:43] ssfgsdgf [19:44] E-mail me. [19:44] email = ? [19:45] jason@textfiles.com [19:51] email sent. [20:10] wuuuu NovaKing here? [20:12] ? [20:12] i've been here for like.... too long [20:21] TOOOOOOO LONG [20:23] oh my [20:23] it's novaking [20:23] o/ [20:24] i mainly lurk now [20:24] helped more back in the day (like a year ago)