The Wayback machine (web.archive.org) is a web crawler which stores websites
since a couple of years, sometimes back to the nineties. I'm just finalizing my
work about updating the POV-Link sites and found a lot (in fact the most) of the
broken links at wayback. But should we really use Wayback? And redirect all the
broken links to the saved mirrors? I'm not quite sure about it.

First I observed sites which are changed by their authors by design. Anto
Matcovic or Toni Bratincevic e.g. removed the POV-content by design. We should
accept this and don't link to older sites at wayback, where the old content
still can be found IMO. Anto and Tony will have their reasons.

The second thought is about the sites which are down due to insolvency of the
providers (geocities, lycos). Some of this users can be found at reocities, in
this case we can assume an agreement to use the old content. Some can be found
at wayback using geocities instead of reocities. But did this people really want
to have their entries restored? May be they simply were lucky to get rid of
their internet entries. And they were not aware of the wayback machine. If they
were interested in an internet site, why didn't they start a new one with a new
provider? And even if you decide to abandon your site for what reason ever, that
should be respected. Who really knowns about a file called robot.txt, which is
respected by the Wayback machine? I do, but who else?

So, still I had a lot of work, to regain old stuff from the wayback machine, my
personal idea is not to use them. We must respect the decisions people made. If
they will withdraw from the net or only some contents we have to accept this.

May be one makes a flaw by random and one will correct it, with Wayback your new
employer finds it.

Best regards,
Michael

Post a reply to this message

Hi Michael,

MichaelJF writes :
> ...
> So, still I had a lot of work, to regain old stuff from the wayback mac
hine, my
> personal idea is not to use them. We must respect the decisions people 
made. If
> they will withdraw from the net or only some contents we have to accept
 this.
>...

My WEB site begun in 1996, and is still referenced here :
<http://www.povray.org/resources/links/POV-Ray_Include_Macro_and_Object_F
iles/Object_and_Scene_Files/>
"
*Eureka parametric surface models*
Site in English, French, Spanish, Dutch and Italian containing 3d
implicit / parametric surface models in POV-Ray format, VRML format
and Mathematica format.
"
The correct link always was <http://eureka.atari.org/vrml/>, so I
think some changes have been done. This old bookmark is perennial.

So far as I remember, my homepage was also referenced from there :
<http://www.povray.org/resources/links/3D_Programs/POV-Ray_Modelling_Prog
rams/>
but, it isn't anymore. That's because I'm developing an ATARI
software that exports POV-Ray scripts and macros. I also ported
POV-Ray to the ATARI platform. POV-Ray for ATARI is still available
there <http://eureka.atari.org/> (perennial bookmark) in 3.1g version.
I used to maintain Persistence Of Vision, when sources were C language.

I know it's not easy to maintain lists of links, because I personally
maintain a list of ATARI bookmarks, that turned in the ATARI Search
Engine, with Google Co-op services <http://eureka.atari.org/atari.html>

I do appreciate still being referenced from the POV-Ray official page.

Best regards,

-- 

Author of Eureka 2.12 (2D Graph Describer, 3D Modeller)
http://eureka.atari.org/

Post a reply to this message

Overall, I agree with your analysis. There is just one subject which 
needs thought however, in my opinion, and that is the historical 
context. The POV-Ray products have grown and evolved over the years 
along with the main program; in some way this historical evolution 
should be preserved for the future. Would it be possible to build a 
comprehensive list of keywords and names and only give the reference of 
the wayback machine? People interested in that kind of historical 
research would thus gain an easy access to the old stuff (I am almost 
sure that nobody is going to /use/ seriously, with a few exceptions here 
and there).

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

>
> I do appreciate still being referenced from the POV-Ray official page.
>

the work under way is not to erase content, but to regain lost one. The link to
your site at the POV-Links site and the POV-Wiki is
perso.wanadoo.fr/eureka2.12/vrml/welcome.html
you gave now
http://eureka.atari.org/vrml/
both links redirect to
http://eureka2.12.pagesperso-orange.fr/vrml/welcome.html
what is still alive, so there is no problem. And I don't think that Maurice (aka
Mr. here), who is the real master of this revision, will decide otherwise.

My point here is, that we should use the wayback machine more carefully as done
in the past. I think regaining an old include file which still can be
instructive after all the years is safe. But regaining complete old sites from
persons who developed into an other direction may be cause trouble.

Best regards,
Michael

Post a reply to this message

On 06/07/2013 6:11 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> My point here is, that we should use the wayback machine more carefully as done
> in the past. I think regaining an old include file which still can be
> instructive after all the years is safe. But regaining complete old sites from
> persons who developed into an other direction may be cause trouble.


You are commendably conscientious, Michael.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 06/07/2013 6:11 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> > My point here is, that we should use the wayback machine more carefully as done
> > in the past. I think regaining an old include file which still can be
> > instructive after all the years is safe. But regaining complete old sites from
> > persons who developed into an other direction may be cause trouble.
>
>
> You are commendably conscientious, Michael.
>
> --
> Regards
>      Stephen

Yes I am. But I was rejected by Jim and Maurice, Maurice seems to be the master
here and I was made very clearly to accept this youngster. I still cannot
understand this behaviour by Jim or Maurice, but they simply give me no access
to the POV wiki.

Best regards,
Michael

Post a reply to this message

On 06/07/2013 8:25 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> Yes I am. But I was rejected by Jim and Maurice, Maurice seems to be the master
> here and I was made very clearly to accept this youngster. I still cannot
> understand this behaviour by Jim or Maurice, but they simply give me no access
> to the POV wiki.

You are probably too quick to take offence, if you have.
They are both busy in RL and have lots to do in their various online roles.

Maybe some of the younger people do not know of the controversy 
surrounding Wayback Machine. The EU considers that it is or can break 
copyright laws. Wikipedia mentions this. IMO your exemplary research is 
the way to do it but it is only too easy not to know the issues and just 

wishes. And an organisation like Pov-Ray.org should set an example, no 
matter how inconvenient.



-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 07/06/2013 03:25 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> On 06/07/2013 6:11 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
>>> My point here is, that we should use the wayback machine more carefully as done
>>> in the past. I think regaining an old include file which still can be
>>> instructive after all the years is safe. But regaining complete old sites from
>>> persons who developed into an other direction may be cause trouble.
>>
>>
>> You are commendably conscientious, Michael.
>>
>> --
>> Regards
>>       Stephen
>
> Yes I am. But I was rejected by Jim and Maurice, Maurice seems to be the master
> here and I was made very clearly to accept this youngster. I still cannot
> understand this behaviour by Jim or Maurice, but they simply give me no access
> to the POV wiki.
>
> Best regards,
> Michael
>
>
Ya know what Micheal ... I have other things to do than just POV-Wiki 
... and we have had a holiday here and I'd like to spend some time with 
my family. You are just to impatient for me, all just because no one 
answered in a timely manner. Oh and BTW I'd sure appreciate it if you'd 
refrain from making anymore fuckin' disparaging remarks about me, the 
process or people that are helping. LOL ... I'm not rejecting you ... 
I'm freekin' ignoring you.

Post a reply to this message

I, for one, and I'm sure Jim neither, didn't mean to be hostile with you
Michael, I am not the one in charge of documentation, Jim is, And thanks mostly
to him and the rest of the community, of whom you are more part of than myself,
POV-Ray has the best documentation in the whole open source world. That's why I
tried to be maybe a little too cautious to lose nothing of the so precious
POV-Ray links legacy. I still mean to pursue this goal, but as you pointed it
out, a wiki is more flexible than I'm used to think of, and I'll just go into
the history to restore what gets lost. So please in any case, do join us and
contribute, any way you please. I am sorry you got offended and managed to
offend Jim  because of my being too directive.
(i am not a native speaker, and I hope any misunderstanding gets cleared)

> > Yes I am. But I was rejected by Jim and Maurice, Maurice seems to be the master
> > here and I was made very clearly to accept this youngster. I still cannot
> > understand this behaviour by Jim or Maurice, but they simply give me no accessh
> > to the POV wiki.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Michael

Post a reply to this message

Hi Maurice,

yes sometimes things are lost to translation and I will put our
misunderstandings as this. And I really hope that this quarrel ends now. And I
hope you can take gain from my findings I posted to the other thread here. About
Jim: I read his last posting here and I think that we should not take it too
seriously. My personal impression is that he was not sober while writing this
offensive lines against me, so I will forgive him.

Best regards from Darmstadt to the south of France,
Michael

Post a reply to this message