4 ms·

I like how it removes noise for the reader. Links cannot simply be put whereever the author pleases. Links have to be put on their own line. (and the browser ca

by julius 6y ago

I like how it removes noise for the reader. Links cannot simply be put whereever the author pleases. Links have to be put on their own line. (and the browser can neatly indicate to you which links are same-domain, other-domain, other-protocol)

gerikson 6y ago
I hate not being able to integrate links in running text - it's been a feature of the web since the start, having to awkwardly add "see this link:" followed by a newline everywhere would drive me mad.
- betwixthewires 6y ago
  I felt that way at first, but when I started to understand the reasoning behind it (explained in the Gemini space FAQ and counties meta articles, which is a lot of Gemini documents) it makes perfect sense. When you're reading a document, it is to enjoy information. Whether that's learning, recreational reading of fiction, or whatever, a subtle part of the experience is the structure of the document. It gives you context and helps maintain a flow of thought. A reference to an external document should be plain as day and stand out. It should not bleed into any other part of the document. This might sound like an over rationalization, but to get an idea for this, imagine if footnotes or references were tossed in using parentheses wherever they were referenced. The structure of the document is important, sometimes as important as the content.
  - Karunamon 6y ago
    I've found that the lack of good footnote handling in Gemini is a real pain in the rear. Consider footnotes in a book, you see the superscript 1 or the star or the cross and you know you glance towards the bottom of the page for that content, then jump back to where you were. On books, in dense text, you can put your finger on your current location, look to the bottom of the page, read that content, then pick up where you left off. On a screen it's harder, since going to "the bottom" involves n pages of text to be scrolled by. If I hit [End], I don't know how many [Pgup] to hit to go back. I can hit [Pgdn] a few times and count mentally (which sucks, and takes me out of the flow), but due to the way text is flowed, reversing with an equal number of [Pgup]s will usually wind up taking me somewhere above or below where I started. This disorientation is not desirable. Inline footnotes on most rich text sites usually have a link directly to the footnote, and then a back link which jumps to where the note was referenced. This is the best of both worlds. I'm on board with most of the Gemini limitations, but I see this being a no-brainer addition to the protocol if not a sane client.
    - gerikson 6y ago
      I drafted a long comment but you put it better.

by julius 6y ago

gerikson 6y ago

I hate not being able to integrate links in running text - it's been a feature of the web since the start, having to awkwardly add "see this link:" followed by a newline everywhere would drive me mad.

betwixthewires 6y ago
I felt that way at first, but when I started to understand the reasoning behind it (explained in the Gemini space FAQ and counties meta articles, which is a lot of Gemini documents) it makes perfect sense. When you're reading a document, it is to enjoy information. Whether that's learning, recreational reading of fiction, or whatever, a subtle part of the experience is the structure of the document. It gives you context and helps maintain a flow of thought. A reference to an external document should be plain as day and stand out. It should not bleed into any other part of the document. This might sound like an over rationalization, but to get an idea for this, imagine if footnotes or references were tossed in using parentheses wherever they were referenced. The structure of the document is important, sometimes as important as the content.
- Karunamon 6y ago
  I've found that the lack of good footnote handling in Gemini is a real pain in the rear. Consider footnotes in a book, you see the superscript 1 or the star or the cross and you know you glance towards the bottom of the page for that content, then jump back to where you were. On books, in dense text, you can put your finger on your current location, look to the bottom of the page, read that content, then pick up where you left off. On a screen it's harder, since going to "the bottom" involves n pages of text to be scrolled by. If I hit [End], I don't know how many [Pgup] to hit to go back. I can hit [Pgdn] a few times and count mentally (which sucks, and takes me out of the flow), but due to the way text is flowed, reversing with an equal number of [Pgup]s will usually wind up taking me somewhere above or below where I started. This disorientation is not desirable. Inline footnotes on most rich text sites usually have a link directly to the footnote, and then a back link which jumps to where the note was referenced. This is the best of both worlds. I'm on board with most of the Gemini limitations, but I see this being a no-brainer addition to the protocol if not a sane client.
  - gerikson 6y ago
    I drafted a long comment but you put it better.