On May 24, 2013 11:44 AM, "Nick" <suckless-dev_AT_njw.me.uk> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 08:04:16AM +0200, Dmitrij Czarkoff wrote:
> > Sanitized HTTP could do. 9p and gopher could do as well.
>
> No, gopher sucks a lot. Seriously. Look at how its menu / index
> system works. It's interesting historically, and there are a few
> interesting gopher sites out there, but if we wanted to replace the
> web with a different hypertext infrastructure gopher would be a
> crappy option.
>
> I feel like the only people who say "gopher ftw" are those who
> haven't created content for it.
>
> markdown over http would be far, far preferable.
Well, I meant the networking part of gopher, not its menu system.
BTW it would be nice to have some syntax-free menu system for the web to
avoid the nightmarish onsite navigation one may find on every other site
out there. Hyperlinks still are needed though.
That said, I never actually tried to make any serious use of gopher (not to
mention content creation), so I may be misunderstanding it. But even if
there is no protocol better then HTTP, it doesn't necessarily mean that
HTTP is OK.
----
Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
Received on Fri May 24 2013 - 14:02:42 CEST