Archive-It captured rendered through wayback machine



  • Avatar
    Karl-Rainer Blumenthal

    Thanks for bringing this up, Rachel. It’s a useful example of the differences between web archival replay tools. In short, you’ve got it right with theory #4 :-) The Wayback Machine at and Archive-It’s Wayback implementation are similar, but are maintained separately and in response to the distinct needs of their users, their scale of content, etc.

    In this case, for instance, because Archive-It’s developers and engineers can respond to issues when flagged by our partners, they can improve upon the replay currently achievable through the more “general” Wayback Machine or other tools. Specifically, I can see that the Wayback Machine has trouble interpreting the necessary CSS files on this example page as CSS--an issue that we’ve encountered in the past with other partners’ captures and have thus been able to address through improvements to Archive-It Wayback. 

    Rest assured in the meantime that the content was indeed captured and is shared between the two access points, and as improvements on the Wayback Machine also continue, replay on its side may improve in the future as well.

  • Avatar
    Rachel Trent

    Thanks, Karl, this is helpful to know!

Please sign in to leave a comment.