Bewertungen für Web Archives
Web Archives von Armin Sebastian
Bewertungen von KirkH420
Bewertet mit 4 von 5 Sternen
von KirkH420, vor 4 JahrenIt works to some extent, I like it's ability to open all the different web archives with one click.
There is a bit of an issue with some archives. For URLs: When I click on an URL to a Microsoft.com out-dated page, the Wayback Machine will take me to Microsoft's Error404 landing page.
This URL for example:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=45885
When passed to this add-on, the Wayback Machine converts it to this page:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220328035922/https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/404Error.aspx
*It's landing on a Wayback Redirect page. After 5 seconds, the page gets redirected to another page.
We can see in the date is /2022-03-28-03:59:22/ and this is one of the newest snapshots created by the Archive. It's unfortunate, but The Wayback Machine continues to create snapshots of these 404 pages.
So someone might say, why don't you just use the Wayback Date-toolbar to turn back to an older date? The problem is, since your tool is finding the newest snapshots, it's returning these 404 pages. This changes the URL that we're searching for.
The API docs for the Wayback Machine says "timestamp is the timestamp to look up in Wayback. If not specified, the most recenty available capture in Wayback is returned."
The correct way to use the API is to create a link like this:
http://archive.org/wayback/available?url=https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=45885×tamp=20010101
*This will return a .json that contains a working "closest snapshot" URL and you can click on it.
It appears that this add-on is not using the API but is trying to manipulate URLs instead. This wont work well.
If you add the "×tamp=20010101" key, it will enable the "Return closest snapshot to the date 2001-01-01" rather than return the newest available snapshot. The downside is, you'll need to write something that will handle the .json API return data. (which shouldn't be very hard)
Doing it that way will ALWAYS return a website. Not those Error404 landing pages.
There is a bit of an issue with some archives. For URLs: When I click on an URL to a Microsoft.com out-dated page, the Wayback Machine will take me to Microsoft's Error404 landing page.
This URL for example:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=45885
When passed to this add-on, the Wayback Machine converts it to this page:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220328035922/https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/404Error.aspx
*It's landing on a Wayback Redirect page. After 5 seconds, the page gets redirected to another page.
We can see in the date is /2022-03-28-03:59:22/ and this is one of the newest snapshots created by the Archive. It's unfortunate, but The Wayback Machine continues to create snapshots of these 404 pages.
So someone might say, why don't you just use the Wayback Date-toolbar to turn back to an older date? The problem is, since your tool is finding the newest snapshots, it's returning these 404 pages. This changes the URL that we're searching for.
The API docs for the Wayback Machine says "timestamp is the timestamp to look up in Wayback. If not specified, the most recenty available capture in Wayback is returned."
The correct way to use the API is to create a link like this:
http://archive.org/wayback/available?url=https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=45885×tamp=20010101
*This will return a .json that contains a working "closest snapshot" URL and you can click on it.
It appears that this add-on is not using the API but is trying to manipulate URLs instead. This wont work well.
If you add the "×tamp=20010101" key, it will enable the "Return closest snapshot to the date 2001-01-01" rather than return the newest available snapshot. The downside is, you'll need to write something that will handle the .json API return data. (which shouldn't be very hard)
Doing it that way will ALWAYS return a website. Not those Error404 landing pages.
343 Bewertungen
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon William Nettles, vor 6 Tagen
- Bewertet mit 4 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 20000799, vor 20 Tagen
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon TheGirlWhoLived89, vor 23 Tagen
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 19983824, vor 23 Tagen
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon PK, vor einem Monat
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon hugh198, vor 2 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 16554821, vor 3 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon hamza waterson, vor 3 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 19882925, vor 3 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Armo, vor 3 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 18285082, vor 4 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon BaraShiro, vor 4 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon ilovemikael, vor 4 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Jatila, vor 4 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon GnarlyCmdr, vor 5 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 1 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 19720321, vor 5 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Dan, vor 6 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 17451381, vor 6 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Jalewood, vor 6 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 15958710, vor 7 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Java, vor 7 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 19611278, vor 7 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Firefox-Benutzer 19604848, vor 7 Monaten
- Bewertet mit 5 von 5 Sternenvon Anonymous, vor 8 MonatenVery useful. Information should be free for all.