[gopher] Re: RFC drafts
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
Whether appropriate or not, what goes into an RFC is often treated by the vast
community of Internet network users as "law". Gopher has not been addressed
often in the RFCs, and what is written about it there, is quoted again, and
again, and again.
Now we have a situation where someone is attempting to "write to stone" so to
speak two new RFCs that deal with Gopher. New RFCs are not as common as one
might think. Therefore when an opportunity arises to give input to the
drafting of one, the opportunity shouldn't be ignored. The point being made by
Mr. Newman is the very crux of the problem... and that point is that these
documents do NOT change the way we try to do things.
This is our opportunity to MAKE CHANGES! In the decade since Gopher was
released we have seen what works, what doesn't, and what can be done better.
With so few operating Gopher servers on the Internet, there is little reason
why we can't dump the junk and do it right.
Fundemental changes of this nature have happened before (converting Usenet to
TCP/IP is just one example that first comes to mind, although it isn't the
only, and certainly not the best example). Although the future can never be
predicted, this time in history may turn out to be the only time that a
fundemental change to Gopher of any characteristic or magnitude may be
practical.
Present your ideas, big or minuscule. Maybe Gopher is perfect, maybe its
not, but either way, explain to the authors of these documents WHY you belive
this to be true.
Benn Newman <newmanbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 08:05:11AM -0700, JumpJet Mailbox wrote:
> Persons seriously interested in giving input about how Gopher will be
> officially codified in the RFCs should examine and respond to the authors of
> documents:
>
> draft-hoffman-gopher-uri-03.txt
> draft-murali-url-gopher.txt
>
> Both of these documents are available on JumpJet (
> gopher://home.jumpjet.info/11\Begin_Here\References ). These RFCs will be as
> important to the Gopher community as RFC1436, and it is imperative that they
> be addressed while still in final draft stage.
Those are *old*. What exactly do they change about the way we (try) to do
things? I noticed some Gopher+ stuff but nothing else of much interest.
--
Benn Newman | newmanbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | gopher://igneous-rock.homeunix.net
-- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis --
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (NetBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAkR/W/0ACgkQFE65lPR8xrG++wCfaGq/L8+X+q8D0wVseh3Peudl
YCoAnjC/vRr0iuQhu3efoI9Qo+uPPu2c
=u5ya
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------
Be a chatter box. Enjoy free PC-to-PC calls with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
|
|