←back to thread

Omnom: Self-hosted bookmarking with searchable, wysiwyg snapshots

(omnom.zone)
210 points mstef | 3 comments | 14 Apr 25 11:42 UTC | HN request time: 0.61s | source

a bit of background. this is a rewrite of omnom by asciimoo - the guy who also made searx. originally i wrote omnom, back in the days when del.icio.us was enshittified and gone down the drain. instead of complaining i was taking the opportunity to write a replacement that i would want, it became omnom, and for many years me and a bunch of users were very happy with it.

but the fast moving world of browser extensions made maintenance (for a non-commercial free software side project) too expensive, so the extension support became erratic, until it died completely. for a year or two i didn't use it.

but then asked asciimo if he could have a look a the extensions (since he was recently working on another extension, so had some experience), he looked at it, and rewrote the whole thing in go and fixed the extension. he even got support from nlnet/ngi0.

if you want to have your own self-hosted libre software bookmarking service for you and your community, give it a go, it's very simple, privacy respecting and most robust when it comes to snapshotting. asciimoo did a great job.

Show context
submeta ◴[14 Apr 25 12:38 UTC] No.43680636[source]▶
I created something like that for my spouse and myself. An app that creates an archive.ph url, extracts full text and generates summaries via an llm. I‘d open source it, but as I also extract paid articles via archive.ph, I think it wouldn’t be ethical to publish it.
replies(1): >>43680705 #
mstef ◴[14 Apr 25 12:47 UTC] No.43680705[source]▶
the difference is, that archive.ph snapshots something in headless. omnom snapshots the exact same state that your browser is displaying you. so if there is js interactions that change the dom, those will be snapshotted, unlike with archive.ph.

also lets not forget that archive.ph wraps everything in their own frame and has their own way of mangling the result. not in a bad way, it's just not the original as it would have been rendered in your browser.

replies(1): >>43680749 #
1. viraptor ◴[14 Apr 25 12:52 UTC] No.43680749[source]▶
Archive.ph is often used, because the "js interactions that change the dom" is typically a paywall. And you won't want it.
replies(2): >>43680804 #>>43681340 #
2. mstef ◴[14 Apr 25 12:59 UTC] No.43680804[source]▶
omnom is for snapshotting, not for circumventing paywalls. i'm merely comparing the snapshot feature of the two projects. circumventing paywalls is out of scope.

your bookmarks will never linkrot away.

3. mstef ◴[14 Apr 25 13:57 UTC] No.43681340[source]▶
btw it is perfectly fine to circumvent a paywall with archive.ph and then to snapshot it with omnon so your bookmark never linkrots away. also when i say "js manipulation" i also mean stuff like captchas, or dynamic documents that you change by interacting with it, or even private services like e.g. rocket chat hidden behind some barrier like http auth, or private vpn. archive.ph will never have access to what your browser might have access to.