RESEARCH COLLECTION / 10 OF 10
Historical Journal.
The long argument, with its footnotes visible. Publish carefully delimited historical investigations with citations, competing interpretations, full source lists and a public revision record.
THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS
A field note is not an exhaustive monograph
A concise investigation can clarify a specific source-based question while acknowledging the areas it does not explore.
Footnotes lead somewhere
Inline citations should connect material claims to relevant items in a Works Cited list, including the type and date of the source where known.
Revisions are part of the published work
Corrections with consequences for the article’s interpretation should be attributed, dated and described in an accessible revision record.
OPEN QUESTIONS
What would settle the record?
- Are factual claims supported by the cited item?
- Does the title promise more than the investigation can show?
- Are counterevidence and revisions presented openly?
BIBLIOGRAPHIC STARTING POINTS
Starting sources
These are identified materials to consult, not a claim that this collection has already completed exhaustive archival verification. Source types are marked to keep later interpretation distinct from contemporary evidence.
- 01Tim Berners-Lee, “Information Management: A Proposal,” March 1989 / May 1990, CERN Repository
Original proposal / archive record
Open source record ↗ - 02CERN, “A Short History of the Web”
Institutional historical account
Open source record ↗ - 03World Wide Web Consortium, “History”
Standards body historical account
Open source record ↗ - 04Computer History Museum, “Collecting Oral Histories: It Takes a Village (or a Museum)”
Museum methodology
Open source record ↗
Edition 1.0.0
8 October 2026. Initial collection overview, research questions and bibliography published. No original interviews, newly acquired artifacts, or independent experiments are claimed. Substantive future changes will be explained here.
Submit counterevidence or an attribution correction ↗