Waterfalls of the Great Lakes Region and Beyond
gowaterfalling.com
gowaterfalling.com
https://www.seat61.com/train-from-toronto-to-vancouver.htm
That and/or the Rocky Mountaineer (how have I not heard of this route?) https://www.seat61.com/RockyMountaineer.htm
Working right now with a static site generator for my own website (Pelican) and been loving it.
The body tag is <BODY bgcolor="#CCCC99" text="#FF0000">
I know it would get gamed really, but what if there were an injected "related-sites" link list as an extension, that drew from a curated directory? That was how you used to explore, through blog and site "friends of" sections that sent you on an endless rabbit hole.
I feel like it can't be feed oriented, because that's a more consumption mindset than exploration mindset, and I feel part of the fun of the old web was that constant active exploration.
I don't want to turn this into a conversation about SEO, but suffice to say commerce dominates search results for so many terms that it can be hard to find anything community oriented, or niche information. So search engines and feed sites are not quite right for exploration.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webring s used to be quite useful, maybe along with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_(software)
Other than that, it's a good question. It's been explored by many that Google tends to forget old content. Alternative search engines, such as DuckDuckGo, in my experience, tend to lean towards indie sites more.
EDIT and, of course, there was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technorati
A federated curated directory, perhaps with an emergent shared vocabulary for tags/categories/etc. (similar to the Wikipedia-centered naming guidelines for wiki pages) might work. The DMOZ model wouldn't scale in the modern web, with its rampant contentiousness around politics etc., and even the original DMOZ broke down because of corruption, with websites having to pay category "editors" for listings.
There was even a tip level directory page of unusual devices connected to the internet. Like there was one single fishtank, one coffee maker and one internet connected vending machine... and everyone thought these things were marvelous and delightful.
Yet, it's nice source of information.
Allowing commentary by the submitter to be pinned to the top would break HN's rule that submitting an article confers no special rights to interpret it for the reader. That's a bedrock rule here. It has served super well over the years.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
I do like the idea of neo-classicist websites though. The "brutalist" websites a few years ago were simply ugly, and I with to avoid the ~2005 era pastel-on-pastel trend to emerge again. (I'd love a neo-gothic website trend, with dark by default though.)
Other great example is: https://patrickcollison.com
--
Yet, world is full of designers and developers who want to achieve something more than plain website. For ordinary Joe it doesn't matter at all if Craigslist is ugly or Facebook, they just use it. But creators want to think users admire good design and user experience. :)
Apparently the same thing has been happening to Elora Gorge. And any of us on the GTHA region have heard the sunflower farm story, I'm sure. (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-how-the-quest...)
Older sites are unfortunately ever rarer, thankfully the archive project does a good job in maintaining a record of all the information they stored.
If you press Previous or Next you will download un-parsed php file .
let me guess it was hosted on PHP-capable host and now moved to PHP non-capable host?
[0] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/ma...
Bonus:
Someone is still maintaining this... How/Why?
By editing the HTML and uploading it again! :) I still do this for lots of older sites I keep going - FTP in (well, SFTP ideally), make a couple of changes in the HTML and you are done. Easy - no compiling or bundling, just edit and save and re-upload (some FTP clients will do the save + re-upload in one-step). Some hosts you just SSH in and edit with vi and save. Aint broke - don't fix it etc.
As for the "why", I guess why does anyone update a website?
Why? Well, as the FAQ on the site says, because they like waterfalls.
More generally, I'm not sure why it strikes you as odd that this site is still being updated. The old(er) way of building sites hasn't gone anywhere, and this site seems perfectly functional. Why not contenue to update it?