Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: gopher: January 2006:
[gopher] Re: Need for protocol changey

[gopher] Re: Need for protocol changey

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: gopher@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gopher] Re: Need for protocol changey
From: Benn Newman <newmanbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 17:19:55 -0600
Reply-to: gopher@xxxxxxxxxxxx

On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 07:12:19AM -0600, Jeff wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 17:09:13 -0600, Benn Newman  
> <newmanbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I have heard a lot of suggestions of changes to Gopher; my question is,  
> > why?
> To address the failings of gopher+.  Why are you opposed (if you are)?
You say there are failings of Gopher+, okay, fine. But what are we actually
trying to do by making changes to the protocol. How does Gopher benefit
from having MIME types being so integrated? As John pointed out
a Tar-gziped file could have any of number of MIME types but you can
always use extensions. I know that .tar.gz or .tgz means a gziped-tar file.
If I want to know a file size, there are perfectly good ways to do so in Gopher+
and in Gopher even. File sizes can be a part of the selectors info text
ex: 0Super cool  book (book.tgz 4kb)\tboot.tgz\\t7070

Feel free to convince me that protocol changes are needed, I haven't
stopped listening yet. *grin*
Benn Newman | newmanbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | gopher://
Wisconsin Association of Gopher Operators
Learn about the Gopher Project:

-- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis --

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (NetBSD)


[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]