Re: biblio.sgml dead link

On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 06:10:07PM +0100, Erik Rijkers wrote:
> The replacement is a ~200 euro pdf (2021).  I'd be thankful if someone would
> send the pdf to me; maybe I can update my JSON tests.
> 
> And we should remove that entry from the bibliography (or have it point to
> the new page [1]).

Removing the entry seems a bit overdoing it to me, and updating to a
paywall does not sound completely right to me either.  Another thing
that we could do is to just remove the link, but keep its reference.

Any thoughts from others?
--
Michael