4 ms·
It's like wearing clothing. If I wear a polo and dress pants, and I'm on the train at 8am, I'm going to white collar work. If I wear jeans at the same time and
by bonestormii_ 6y ago
It's like wearing clothing.
If I wear a polo and dress pants, and I'm on the train at 8am, I'm going to white collar work. If I wear jeans at the same time and have my partner with me, I'm a middle class, middle aged, probably-parent on personal business that could probably be described as "running an errand". If I'm a 42 year old man wearing bright purple halter top, with black lipstick and combat boots on the train at 8am--you don't know me! Where the hell am I going? How am I living? You don't understand how to talk to me, so don't bother unless you are a 27 year old woman with red eye liner, green air, blue lipstick and a brady bunch t-shirt on! We wouldn't understand each other!
Elaborate protocol jokes aside, it's an apt analogy. It works--for some people, some of the time. They are dreamers living life waiting for a tomorrow that may never come, but the cause gives them their identity. Chances are that Bob and Linda still have to straighten up on Monday mornings and assimilate to the general protocol. But that's the world we live in, is it not?
I like it. I don't like to deal with it when I'm at the bank or the brokerage, but Friday night, it's alright with me.
I don't begrudge their them identities. However, it's a weak, unopinionated protocol. No inline images? Just because you support them doesn't mean they don't exist.
Users will have their inline images, and they will build clients, and the protocol will be defined. If not by you, then by someone else.
That is the story of the modern web, and that is, funny enough, how we got here.
Nostalgia isn't productive. A new protocol isn't insurmountable, but it has to be native to the time you are living in. You don't need to necessarily inline videos and graphics, but you need to define how these should be handled, or at the very least, the boundaries of the protocol. Waxing whimsically at people creating readers to handle inline images in an ad hoc way... lol, why? Why are they doing this?! They were just bemoaning the current state of the web! My god, have some foresight!
Make a protocol, make a browser, define the boundaries and perhaps adjacent protocols, set your browser roadmap accordingly. Stop when you feel the coverage of the desired space is sufficient. If that's text-only, fine. But you must have answers to how an image or video should be served to the good people of this community.
- peteyboy 6y agoThe thing is, when the web grew up, there was no not-web. Gemini occupies a swim lane, and if you want more, even a gemini page can link to a web page to do the heavy lifting of the modern web. So aside from making the bear dance, there's little interesting in forcing inline images. It will be not that the bear dances well, but that it dances at all, right? There is definitely a part of the Gemini community--from what I've seen--that is really excited to see the http 0.9 grow up that they missed the first time. But so far cooler heads are using their persuasion to knock most of that urge down. What will save gemini from turning into the modern web is that the modern web will be right there the whole time. I guess the perverse server and client could collude to deform the gemini protocol to look like http, but why? "=> http://www.mysite/recipe-with-inline-images/ http://www.mysite/recipe-with-inline-images/ Step by step recipes " in your .gmi file would do this so much better.