[gopher] Re: Gopher "robots.txt"

[Cameron Kaiser <spectre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > Also, this doesn't solve the problem adequately for those *servers*
> > which are not gopher+ compliant, or certain subsets of indexed search
> > servers that can't or don't make gopher+ compliant responses (I can think
> > of several immediately).

> Hm.  Well, I can agree with this, but at the same time, what is to
> become of gopher+?  You can either merge it with the original gopher
> and say "this is what gopher is, and we'll write software
> accordingly", or you can throw out gopher+ and stick only with gopher,
> but having gopher+ sitting around as something that might be supported
> and might not be seems like a pain.  Gopher+ has some decent
> abilities, and I don't see why you shouldn't use them in this
> situation.  So maybe we should be asking if gopher+ is something that
> should continue to be sometimes-supported, or if it should be taken in
> or thrown out.

Let's stick with the smaller issue first :-) I think Emanuel's idea is
great for encoding that information in Gopher+ attributes; it just seems
to leave non-G+ servers out and those aren't just going to disappear.
If people want an official stopgap-only solution, fine -- I just need to
know what the bot should support that will work for the widest range of
servers *now*, since I need to get it running again soon.

-- 
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
 Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-- Really???? WOW!!!!! I'm shallow TOO!!!!! -----------------------------------