Is there an open-source library for archiving a URL, including all assets (JS, graphics, etc.)? This task is trickier than it initially seems. I'd love to have a local cache of bookmarked URLs.
If you don't mind free but closed source, Evernote.
Bookmarking is more complex than you think
21–30 of 33 posts
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#22It's complex, or like with project management, there seems to be so many different use cases, and also legacy ideas and workflows. For example for some people tags are the most important thing in a bookmarking service (even you when you have a full-text search for everything), and for some they're just annoying.
What I think about it, is that bookmarking, most of the time, isn't bookmarking anymore. It used to be that to bookmarked a site like "yahoo.com" to your browser since domains were hard to remember. Now you "bookmark" things, like the OP described, to use the them now or later.
Also most of the time you care more about the content (article, image, video) than the url or the site. What I think bookmarking is, is that it's a way to research, use and understand information on the web.
Why I collect or bookmarks stuff, is because it's my way to learn and remember. It's like making notes on lectures, so you actually try to pay attention to what it's being said (and sometimes you just want to focus on other things and save things for later.)
(we're working on it https://kippt.com)
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#23Is there an open-source library for archiving a URL, including all assets (JS, graphics, etc.)? This task is trickier than it initially seems. I'd love to have a local cache of bookmarked URLs.
What about browser -> save as -> save as type "Website, complete"? Not really a library, and not really something you could do retro-actively to urls already bookmarked without revisiting the pages, but it sort of works.
Regarding a library for archiving a URL - it'd be interesting if there were a way to save a url by inline css and javascript in the html, and converting images and other assets to data urls.
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
My favorite for #4 is Google's +1. You need a Google Plus account. +1 is like Facebook like, only it boosts the ranking of that link whenever you are logged in and search. Not every page has a +1 button, but there is a chrome plugin for that. Side effect: the links you +1 are boosted for your G+ friends too, so the bookmarks are sort of public.
Not gonna work for me. First thing I do after installing a browser is to install ghostery and disable all the social buttons. Also, wouldn't you be exposing yourself to spam from all the sites you +1 ?
I could be wrong here, but I don't think you get inbound posts in your G+ stream (or email) from +1s, unlike FB "Likes" which give the owner the ability to post to your New Feed. On G+ you have to go and explicitly "Circle" a business / web site to see their posts.
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#25Is there an open-source library for archiving a URL, including all assets (JS, graphics, etc.)? This task is trickier than it initially seems. I'd love to have a local cache of bookmarked URLs.
HTTrack (http://www.httrack.com/), maybe...
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#26Is there an open-source library for archiving a URL, including all assets (JS, graphics, etc.)? This task is trickier than it initially seems. I'd love to have a local cache of bookmarked URLs.
Wget can do it, with variable success.
I thought about building one in PhantomJS, since it seems it can extract all the required assets, but gave up on it since most of the content I care about is in my RSS archive anyway.
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#27Am I the only one here that is quite satisfied with the bookmarking system in my web browser?
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#28most currently existing bookmarking services support tags... you could use "now", "later" or "future" tags?
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#29Is there an open-source library for archiving a URL, including all assets (JS, graphics, etc.)? This task is trickier than it initially seems. I'd love to have a local cache of bookmarked URLs.
Wget can do it, with variable success. I thought about building one in PhantomJS, since it seems it can extract all the required assets, but gave up on it since most of the content I care about is in my RSS archive anyway.
Wget is good if you have the right options (http://psung.blogspot.com/2008/06/using-wget-or-curl-to-down...).
For some audio/video sites there is youtube-dl, there is a list of sites it handles here: http://rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/documentation.html .
EDIT: there is a writeup about that is partially based on wget here: http://www.gwern.net/Archiving%20URLs#local-caching (also includes extracting URL from firefox history)
EDIT2: and if you're really desperate you could always use tcpdump/mitmdump and something like this: http://justniffer.sourceforge.net/#!/justniffer_grab_http_tr...
Re: Bookmarking is more complex than you think
#30[deleted]