Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- design:archives [2026/08/13 22:44] – Extend: what an archive preserves and what it does not (static capture, escapes, coverage, vantage), corpus-backed Use in Publications, best-practice checklist, anachronism trap, self-recording alternative; correct five stale/wrong facts (Wayback size, Sa karel.kubicek.claude
+++ design:archives [2026/08/21 14:50] (current) – Boxes: <wrap> renders a span, use uppercase <WRAP>; one box per list, not per bullet karel.kubicek.claude
@@ Line 290: / Line 290: @@
 ===== Open Questions =====
-  * <wrap todo>**The archive comparison needs redoing, and the instrument for redoing it shrank.** Memento Time Travel was decommissioned in 2025; MemGator survives but reaches 13 archives rather than 30-plus, so Hantke et al.'s enumeration {[hantke2023you]} cannot be repeated as written and its 2022 coverage numbers are now four years old. Nobody has published a current census of which public web archives still crawl.</wrap>
+<WRAP todo>
-  * <wrap todo>**Nobody has re-measured static-vs-dynamic archive bias at scale.** The 73.9%/95.3% tracker gap {[hantke2023you]} rests on 2,026 sites, limited by rate-limiting. Zhu et al.'s {[zhu2025_toward]} 45.8% fidelity gap is measured on their own crawls, not on the Internet Archive's holdings. A large-scale measurement of what the Internet Archive itself is missing, per resource type, does not exist.</wrap>
+  * **The archive comparison needs redoing, and the instrument for redoing it shrank.** Memento Time Travel was decommissioned in 2025; MemGator survives but reaches 13 archives rather than 30-plus, so Hantke et al.'s enumeration {[hantke2023you]} cannot be repeated as written and its 2022 coverage numbers are now four years old. Nobody has published a current census of which public web archives still crawl.
-  * <wrap todo>**Monoculture risk is unquantified.** Roughly two thirds of archive-using papers depend on one archive, one crawler and one vantage point. What that shared bias does to the field's longitudinal results has not been studied — and Common Crawl, the only comparison Hantke et al. could make, was rejected on coverage rather than validated on agreement.</wrap>
+  * **Nobody has re-measured static-vs-dynamic archive bias at scale.** The 73.9%/95.3% tracker gap {[hantke2023you]} rests on 2,026 sites, limited by rate-limiting. Zhu et al.'s {[zhu2025_toward]} 45.8% fidelity gap is measured on their own crawls, not on the Internet Archive's holdings. A large-scale measurement of what the Internet Archive itself is missing, per resource type, does not exist.
-  * <wrap todo>**Archive-based measurement of regional phenomena has no instrument.** Both major sources crawl from the US. For GDPR-era consent, geo-blocking or regional advertising, there is no archive with an EU vantage point at usable coverage — the national archives fail the freshness test.</wrap>
+  * **Monoculture risk is unquantified.** Roughly two thirds of archive-using papers depend on one archive, one crawler and one vantage point. What that shared bias does to the field's longitudinal results has not been studied — and Common Crawl, the only comparison Hantke et al. could make, was rejected on coverage rather than validated on agreement.
+  * **Archive-based measurement of regional phenomena has no instrument.** Both major sources crawl from the US. For GDPR-era consent, geo-blocking or regional advertising, there is no archive with an EU vantage point at usable coverage — the national archives fail the freshness test.
+</WRAP>
 ===== Related Pages =====