[rfc-i] Can the web be archived?

Eliot Lear lear at cisco.com
Mon Jan 19 21:41:10 PST 2015

The New Yorker reports[1] about how links go stale on the web, and how
this is impacting journals and the like.  I thought it might be
interesting to this lot in terms of how and when we cite URLs.  You'll
note, I'm only posting a URL about the article, but in a spate of
cruelty, the New Yorker article doesn't have a to the study they quote,
and so I can't claim to be posting about a URL to a URL ;-)

Here's the relevant quote:

> But a 2013 survey of law- and policy-related publications found that,
> at the end of six years, nearly fifty per cent of the URLs cited in
> those publications no longer worked. According to a 2014 study
> conducted at Harvard Law School, “more than 70% of the URLs within the
> Harvard Law Review and other journals, and 50% of the URLs within
> United States Supreme Court opinions, do not link to the originally
> cited information.” 


[1] http://www.newyorker.com/?p=2960285&mbid=social_tablet_f

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20150120/966a8383/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 486 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20150120/966a8383/attachment.asc>

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list