The impact of JavaScript on archivability

Brunelle, Justin F.; Kelly, Mat; Weigle, Michele C.; Nelson, Michael L.

doi:10.1007/s00799-015-0140-8

Cited by 21 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As measured in our prior work [12], the resources in the Archive-It set receive an HTTP 200 response for 93.5 % of all requests for embedded resources and the resources in the Twitter set receive an HTTP 200 response for 87.1 % of all requests for embedded resources.…”

Section: Dataset Selectionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…This experiment uses the same set of 2,000 URI-Rs as in our previous work [12], which was sampled from Twitter and Archive-It. The first dataset, the Twitter set, consists of 1,000 Bitly URIs shared over Twitter and represents a more random selection of URI-Rs not explicitly selected for curation by human archivists.…”

Section: Dataset Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our previous investigation showed that WebCite has difficulties when encountering JavaScript and embedded iframes [12]. However, its archiving policies provide immediate results as opposed to crawlers that may incur a delay between the time a URI-R is added to the frontier and a memento is created.…”

Section: Measuring Webcitementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Not all mementos are created equal: measuring the impact of missing resources

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Web archives do not always capture every resource on every page that they attempt to archive. This results in archived pages missing a portion of their embedded resources. These embedded resources have varying historic, utility, and importance values. The proportion of missing embedded resources does not provide an accurate measure of their impact on the Web page; some embedded resources are more important to the utility of a page than others. We propose a method to measure the relative value of embedded resources and assign a damage rating to archived pages as a way to evaluate archival success. In this paper, we show that Web users' perceptions of damage are not accurately estimated by the proportion of missing embedded resources. In fact, the proportion of missing embedded resources is a less accurate estimate of resource damage than a random selection. We propose a damage rating algorithm that provides closer alignment to Web user perception, providing an overall improved agreement with users on memento damage by 17 % and an improvement by 51 % if the mementos have a damage rating delta >0.30. We use our algorithm to measure damage in the Internet Archive, showing that it is getting better at mitigating damage over time (going from a damage ). However, we show that a greater number of important embedded resources (2.05 per memento on average) are missing over time. Alternatively, the damage in WebCite is increasing over time (going from 0.375 in 2007 to 0.475 in 2014), while the missing embedded resources remain constant (13 % of the resources are missing on average). Finally, we investigate the impact of JavaScript on the damage of the archives, showing that a crawler that can archive JavaScript-dependent representations will reduce memento damage by 13.5 %.

show abstract

Section: Dataset Selectionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Dataset Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Not all mementos are created equal: measuring the impact of missing resources

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because the turkers identified m0 in the m0 vs m1 in 81% of the comparisons, we used turkers to evaluate our mea- This experiment uses the same set of 2,000 URI-Rs as in our previous work [6], which was sampled from Twitter and Archive-It. The first dataset, the Twitter set, consists of Bitly URIs shared over Twitter.…”

Section: Evaluating Organic Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

Not all mementos are created equal: Measuring the impact of missing resources

Brunelle

Kelly

SalahEldeen

et al. 2014

IEEE/ACM Joint Conference on Digital Libraries

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Web archives do not capture every resource on every page that they attempt to archive. This results in archived pages missing a portion of their embedded resources. These embedded resources have varying historic, utility, and importance values. The proportion of missing embedded resources does not provide an accurate measure of their impact on the Web page; some embedded resources are more important to the utility of a page than others. We propose a method to measure the relative value of embedded resources and assign a damage rating to archived pages as a way to evaluate archival success. In this paper, we show that Web users' perceptions of damage are not accurately estimated by the proportion of missing embedded resources. The proportion of missing embedded resources is a less accurate estimate of resource damage than a random selection. We propose a damage rating algorithm that provides closer alignment to Web user perception, providing an overall improved agreement with users on memento damage by 17% and an improvement by 51% if the mementos are not similarly damaged. We use our algorithm to measure damage in the Internet Archive, showing that it is getting better at mitigating damage over time (going from 0.16 in 1998 to 0.13 in 2013). However, we show that a greater number of important embedded resources (2.05 per memento on average) are missing over time.

show abstract

“…Archive.is, Mummify, Perma.cc and WebCitation (see Table 1), all provide URI submission and archive browsing services with obfuscated URIs, though none make accessible a resultant WARC file. Brunelle et al [6] highlighted the difficulties that current archival crawlers have with capturing content on the live web that relies on JavaScript, and Kelly et al [7] showed the ramifications this has had on preserving web pages over time. Brunelle pointed out that sometimes what archives show as preserved actually "reaches out" into the live web on replay, causing false positives [8].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Archival Acid Test: Evaluating archive performance on advanced HTML and JavaScript

Kelly¹,

Nelson²,

Weigle³

2014

IEEE/ACM Joint Conference on Digital Libraries

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When preserving web pages, archival crawlers sometimes produce a result that varies from what an end-user expects. To quantitatively evaluate the degree to which an archival crawler is capable of comprehensively reproducing a web page from the live web into the archives, the crawlers' capabilities must be evaluated. In this paper, we propose a set of metrics to evaluate the capability of archival crawlers and other preservation tools using the Acid Test concept. For a variety of web preservation tools, we examine previous captures within web archives and note the features that produce incomplete or unexpected results. From there, we design the test to produce a quantitative measure of how well each tool performs its task.

show abstract

The impact of JavaScript on archivability

Cited by 21 publications

References 33 publications

Not all mementos are created equal: measuring the impact of missing resources

Not all mementos are created equal: measuring the impact of missing resources

Not all mementos are created equal: Measuring the impact of missing resources

The Archival Acid Test: Evaluating archive performance on advanced HTML and JavaScript

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About