<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://dashes.com/anil/1999/08/metacontent-and.html" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://dashes.com/anil/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:dashes.com,2009:/anil//1/tag:www.dashes.com,1999:/anil//1.11-</id>
  <updated></updated>
  <title>Comments for meta-content and ghostsites</title>
  <subtitle>A Blog About Making Culture</subtitle>
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.3-en</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.dashes.com,1999:/anil//1.11</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://dashes.com/anil/1999/08/metacontent-and.html" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://dashes.com/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=1/entry_id=11" title="meta-content and ghostsites" />
    <published>1999-08-04T16:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2005-08-12T06:49:23Z</updated>
    <title>meta-content and ghostsites</title>
    <summary>From the silly to the sublime... it seems the Internet brings out people&apos;s interest in Meta-Content whether it&apos;s Slate or Brill&apos;s Content in my bookmarks,...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Anil</name>
      <uri>http://anildash.com/</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="nyc" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://dashes.com/anil/">
      <![CDATA[<p><strong>From the silly to the sublime...</strong> it seems the Internet brings out people's interest in <strong>Meta-Content</strong> whether it's <a href="http://www.slate.com">Slate</a> or <a href="http://www.brillscontent.com">Brill's Content</a> in my <a href="http://www.dashes.com/anil/bookmark/">bookmarks</a>, or any of the other media analyses on the web, everyone wants to explain everything to everyone else.</p>
<p>This trend isn't so surprising, but what is surprising is <strong>how little of this content refers to the web itself</strong>. But of course the point of today's rant is that there are now self-referential web reviews, the first of which has tickled my fancy for quite some time: <a href="http://www.disobey.com/ghostsites/">GhostSites</a>. It's an archive/homage to sites which have been abandoned by their creators, muddling along in HTML purgatory optimized for browsers which have long been superceded. And it's funny, too.</p>
<p>A little more geeky and less accessible is <a href="http://www.plinko.net/404/area404.asp">Area 404</a>. If you don't know, 404 is the generic error message a server would spit out to your web browser if the URL referenced a page that doesn't exist. Being <strong>exceedingly unhelpful</strong>, the 404 on most sites these days has been replaced by (somewhat) helpful custom error pages. And herein lies the charm of Area 404, documenting the <strong>best, worst, funniest, and strangest</strong> of the 404 errors on the web. <strong>Cool!</strong></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>

</feed>
