While I'm generally on the side of stable URLs and at least
not letting them rot through carelessness and neglect, David does bring
up some valid points. I am reminded of something I once heard
Le Roy Barnett (former head reference archivist at the state archives)
say on the phone to a caller. He explained to the caller (as
only Le Roy Barnett could do) that the archives are more in the business
of destroying information than preserving it. He gave some
figures which I don't remember about the proportion of governmental
records that they destroy vs the amount that they preserve.
Maybe that's a standard line in the archive business, but for me it was a
new way of thinking about it. They are selective about what they
preserve.
John Gorentz
At 12:13 PM 9/3/2009, Richard Wiggins wrote:
If you think ISBNs are used by any
library as shelving numbers, and if you think a research library uses
Dewey, and if you think libraries switch shelving schemes in
midstream.... then I'm not going to be able to make you understand why
changing URLs willy-nilly is common, but foolish.
URL changes that occur because you've hired a new director or installed a
new technology are inexcusable. Period.
And if you insist on changing URLs in a site re-org, you can still build
a smart Error 404 handler that redirects to the old content.
Link rot is a willful, arrogant act.
/rich
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:44 AM, David McFarlane
<[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Rich,
And why should I expect URLs to persist? Shelf numbers for books do
in fact change -- as time progress, libraries may change from, e.g., the
Dewey Decimal system to Library of Congress numbers to ISBNs, and who is
to say what further scheme will come along to supplant those? Must
we forever lock ourselves into old organizational schemes when better
ones come along? And the street addresses of homes or businesses do
in fact change all the time, every time a family or business moves.
It is then up to the family or business to arrange for mail and visitors
to get redirected to the new address for a short time; anyone who shows
up at my address of 20 or 30 years ago is just a fool, and I feel no
obligation to provide redirection from those old addresses. And if
an organization's URL scheme turns out to be a nightmare, should they
remain locked in to it rather than revise it to one that better fits
their and their customers' needs going forward?
And after all, aren't URLs and all they represent just a *human*
undertaking, and humans notoriously unreliable and fickle, and their
systems subject to constant improvement? I am not saying that I
don't want URLs to persist, in fact I would like that. But I know
better than to *expect* such persistence, that's all.
-- dkm
Why? Why shouldn't URLs
persist? Do LC shelf numbers for books change? Does the
street address of your house or business
change?
