On Tue 19 May 2020, Dominic Hargreaves <dom(a)earth.li> wrote:
If they are truly read-only, and can be cleaned up,
in running them is small. But on the other hand, running the software
is probably not the most effective way to set up an long-lived
archive. A static HTML export, either hosted locally, or being hosted
by one of the options discussed below, would make more sense.
Yes, in the long run I want to do a static export of the Croydon
site. I’m keeping it running on OpenGuides for now since I’m still
adding historical information and also I’d like to transition the page
titles over to addresses as the current businesses close (which... is
going to happen faster than usual, I suspect, since quite a lot of
them aren’t going to make it through all this).
A couple of examples:
I’m wondering if doing something similar for Oxford would be a good idea. A
fair bit of it could probably be done remotely using Street View. If you
don’t want to leave the sites open for all public editing, you could do
something like I’ve done for the Croydon one, which has editable and
non-editable versions running off the same database.
This is very interesting, although it didn't
strike me as being the
most accessible set of sites (quite a lot of clicking around to find
content that was actually available to the public). I was going to
suggest the archive.org
as being good enough.
I’m not sure it actually is good enough for the purposes of local
historians, since the archived sites aren’t searchable and AFAIK aren’t
indexed by Google either. Fine if you already know that an Oxford Guide
exists (and its URL), no good if you’re websearching for info about Oxford
in the past, or about a specific pub/whatever.