On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 00:26:40 -0400, Arch Stanton wrote:

> For years I've used the 'kazlib' library, which is very nice open-source
> collection of hash, tree, and list data types. And for all that time
> I've used its online documentation as bookmarked at
> http://users.footprints.net/~kaz/kazlib.html. Unfortunately, as of the
> last few months that entire domain seems to be dead, and kazlib hasn't
> moved anywhere else.
>

You could ask the author of kazlib. Kaz Kylheku is involved in active
threads on a few programming groups. He has a gmail address. Type his
name in google, and I bet you can find him.

stonerfish

jellybean stonerfish wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 00:26:40 -0400, Arch Stanton wrote:
>
>> For years I've used the 'kazlib' library, which is very nice open-source
>> collection of hash, tree, and list data types. And for all that time
>> I've used its online documentation as bookmarked at
>> http://users.footprints.net/~kaz/kazlib.html. Unfortunately, as of the
>> last few months that entire domain seems to be dead, and kazlib hasn't
>> moved anywhere else.
>>
>
> You could ask the author of kazlib. Kaz Kylheku is involved in active
> threads on a few programming groups. He has a gmail address. Type his
> name in google, and I bet you can find him.

Good idea, thanks.

Andrew Gabriel wrote:
> In article ,
> Arch Stanton writes:
>> For years I've used the 'kazlib' library, which is very nice open-source
>> collection of hash, tree, and list data types. And for all that time
>> I've used its online documentation as bookmarked at
>> http://users.footprints.net/~kaz/kazlib.html. Unfortunately, as of the
>> last few months that entire domain seems to be dead, and kazlib hasn't
>> moved anywhere else.
>
> There's a 6 month old copy on the WayBackMachine...
> http://web.archive.org/web/200802130...az/kazlib.html
>

Ah, yes, thanks. But if I could follow up on this part (slightly off
topic): is there a way to save this tree of HTML files as a coherent
suite? I don't want to make the same mistake of relying on the WayBack
Machine indefinitely, so I've been trying to save it. I tried "wget -r
-k -p [url]" but that doesn't work because wget "respects the Robots
Exclusion Standard" which apparently means recursive traversal is
suppressed when it sees a "robots.txt" file. Since I don't think that
preserving a small, valuable, and otherwise-lost doc set is evil, I
hacked wget to *not* respect the exclusion standard and tried again,
this time getting a larger but still incomplete set of pages. Does
anyone know how to grab the set of doc files under the URL above (just a
few hundred files I imagine)? I would happily put them on my website for
general consumption.

Thanks,
AS

Arch Stanton wrote:
> Andrew Gabriel wrote:
>> In article ,
>> Arch Stanton writes:
>>> For years I've used the 'kazlib' library, which is very nice open-source
>>> collection of hash, tree, and list data types. And for all that time
>>> I've used its online documentation as bookmarked at
>>> http://users.footprints.net/~kaz/kazlib.html. Unfortunately, as of the
>>> last few months that entire domain seems to be dead, and kazlib hasn't
>>> moved anywhere else.
>>
>> There's a 6 month old copy on the WayBackMachine...
>> http://web.archive.org/web/200802130...az/kazlib.html
>>
>>
>
> Ah, yes, thanks. But if I could follow up on this part (slightly off
> topic): is there a way to save this tree of HTML files as a coherent
> suite? I don't want to make the same mistake of relying on the WayBack
> Machine indefinitely, so I've been trying to save it. I tried "wget -r
> -k -p [url]" but that doesn't work because wget "respects the Robots
> Exclusion Standard" which apparently means recursive traversal is
> suppressed when it sees a "robots.txt" file. Since I don't think that
> preserving a small, valuable, and otherwise-lost doc set is evil, I
> hacked wget to *not* respect the exclusion standard and tried again,
> this time getting a larger but still incomplete set of pages. Does
> anyone know how to grab the set of doc files under the URL above (just a
> few hundred files I imagine)? I would happily put them on my website for
> general consumption.

Ah, well, good news and bad news. Bad news: the terms of use
(http://www.archive.org/about/terms.php) specifically disallow copying
out for some reason or other. Good news: they do not prohibit direct,
long-term use (which I thought they did). In other words users are
allowed/encouraged to bookmark and use a URL into the Wayback Machine. I
still worry that it might go away someday but this does seem like a
viable solution for the foreseeable future.

Thanks,
AS

On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:48:34 -0400, Arch Stanton wrote:

> Ah, well, good news and bad news. Bad news: the terms of use
> (http://www.archive.org/about/terms.php) specifically disallow copying
> out for some reason or other.

I forbid anyone to read this sentence.

It doesn't necessarily mean that there is any legal or moral reason that
you can't or shouldn't though.

On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:05:22 +0000, viza wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:48:34 -0400, Arch Stanton wrote:
>
>> Ah, well, good news and bad news. Bad news: the terms of use
>> (http://www.archive.org/about/terms.php) specifically disallow copying
>> out for some reason or other.
>
> I forbid anyone to read this sentence.
>
> It doesn't necessarily mean that there is any legal or moral reason that
> you can't or shouldn't though.

Exactly. Did archive.org get permission to copy all the stuff they have
on their site?