zlacker

>>legran+(OP)
Google: you are a web company. Please learn to publish your research papers as web pages.

>>simonw+d4
I really wish that browsers had developed first-class support for offline web page bundles. There's no way to share a page that is guaranteed to be self-contained and not hit the network, especially if you want to use javascript. It's particularly frustrating since browsers supported offline mode as far back as the 90s; it just needed to be combined with support for loading from zipped folders.

That simple change would've largely solved the academic paper problem decades ago. It's bizarre that it still isn't a feature.

>>jml7c5+ze
One option her is to inline all assets - images etc - as bas64 URIs. The HTML page ends up huge but it will at least be self-contained.

>>simonw+Oe
Yes, but it's not guaranteed to be self-contained. I wouldn't want to open a random HTML file knowing that it could phone home, or that the content might break one day without me realizing. There's a practical and psychological aspect to sharing `steves_paper_2014.html` versus `steves_paper_2014.offlinesitebundle`. The latter feels safe and immutable.

>>jml7c5+og
What you want is an HTML tag or response header that restricts network access, which the browser can then enforce. Offline or a list of allowed domains, this would be great for security in general. Not so great for advertisers though.

>>irq-1+jw
Then you have to verify that the tag is there, right? But if it has another extension like .offlinebundle you can know thay browsers will not make any extra requests.