3 ms·
Honestly, you've just described about 95% of gemini exactly. It's TLS required (even 1.2+), line-based parsing with text/gemini content, it's actually even simp
by acdw 6y ago
Honestly, you've just described about 95% of gemini exactly. It's TLS required (even 1.2+), line-based parsing with text/gemini content, it's actually even simpler to parse than XML, since it's line-based (just peek at first 3 characters, you know the line type from that). It doesn't use CSS or JS at all, styling is totally up to the client.
So like I said, you've basically just described gemini :)
- vbezhenar 6y agoThe difference is you can't just open Gemini protocol in the browser, so you're limiting audience of your resource to a very minority. That's what I want to highlight: something that is compatible with modern web, yet simpler so alternative browsers could be implemented.
- acdw 6y agoYou actually can open Gemini in a web browser, using a proxy like proxy.vulpes.one or portal.mozz.us. I tried to write a Firefox extension a la OverbiteWX for gemini to automatically redirect links, but my JS-fu isn't strong enough.