3 ms·
How is viewing the WARC after? Is it the same quality as archive.is/ or archive.org/ ?
by fouc 7y ago
How is viewing the WARC after? Is it the same quality as archive.is/ or archive.org/ ?
- edraferi 7y agoPretty good, depending on the tooling. I’m having good luck with https://webrecorder.io/ https://webrecorder.io/ and their related open-source tools.
- shakna 7y agoarchive.org use WARC if I remember correctly, and offer guides on creating and reading the format.
- cookiecaper 7y agoIt's a pain, like most of the WARC ecosystem. It's been several months since I dug in, so maybe it's had some spitshine the last little bit, but I usually end up using combinations of wpull, grab-site, and a smattering of other utilities to reliably capture a page/set of pages, and have had to make some quick hacks as well as manually merging in some PRs to get things to work with Python3. Once I have the WARC, I typically end up using warcat to extract the contents into a local directory and explore that way. WARC as a format seems promising, but at least last I checked, open-source tooling to make it a pleasant and/or transparent experience is not really there, and worse, at least as of several months ago, doesn't really seem actively worked on. Definitely an area you'd expect to be further along.