Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: gopher: February 2009:
[gopher] Re: Anouncement: A New Version of Gopher Client

[gopher] Re: Anouncement: A New Version of Gopher Client

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: gopher@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gopher] Re: Anouncement: A New Version of Gopher Client
From: Cameron Kaiser <spectre@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 12:49:56 -0800 (PST)
Reply-to: gopher@xxxxxxxxxxxx

> > It's sort of HTTP/HTML with none of the advantages. I'd rather work in
> > HTML than RTF, although I suppose at the time RTF was more developed and
> > had more markup features.
> If I understand correctly the advantage they saw in RTF is
> text+images=1 file -> you only have to fetch the information from the
> server once. With html you would need to download the images
> separately.

Okay, I'll buy that. We still don't have full use of the data: URI even
now, so +1.

> > The real question would be if it degraded gracefully (i.e., a regular
> > gopher menu for every RTF menu), which I haven't investigated. If it did,
> > then I *would* call that an advantage, but I imagine that was not part
> > of the spec.
> I don't think they were thinking about that. This sort of menus don't
> work at all in any other Gopher+ client - they just display lots of
> error lines.

No, I mean some sort of mechanism to degrade for older clients (i.e., the
older client doesn't see or even request the RTF menu). I guess that could
be done through the normal Gopher+ VIEWS method however.

------------------------------------ personal: --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * * ckaiser@xxxxxxxxxxxx
-- Do you think I could buy back my introduction to you? -- Groucho Marx ------

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