6 ms·

Don't forget Gopher! Orignal: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1436 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1436 Gopher+: https://github.com/gopher-protocol/gopher-plus

Don't forget Gopher! Orignal: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1436 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1436 Gopher+: https://github.com/gopher-protocol/gopher-plus https://github.com/gopher-protocol/gopher-plus I feel like there is a lot of potential to "rejuvenate" Gopher somewhat in today's internet. No javascript, no cookies, no ads, no auto-play videos etc. There are some nice new modern GUIs like https://gophie.org https://gophie.org that are cross platform and modern. Fun fact: Redis (yes - that Redis) just added Gopher protocol support (https://redis.io/topics/gopher https://redis.io/topics/gopher)

jl6 6y ago
I hope you are aware of Gemini which aims to do exactly that?
hliyan 6y ago
I sometimes wonder if the web would have been a better place had CSS and everything but the most basic HTML tags didn't exist.
- berniemadoff69 6y ago
  yes
tdeck 6y ago
But also no hyperlinks, no mixing text with images, and no unicode support in the menus.
- mattlondon 6y ago
  I think there is probably a lot of mileage that can be gained serving markdown over gopher with embedded gopher:// hyperlinks and images and utf8 and everything else markdown supports via gopher itself. Gopher0 already has sort-of support for HTML file types so this would not be such a wild divergence from the original design. Not serving HTML provides some basic guarantees (no JavaScript, no tracking pixelsnetc) Gopher+ allows for quite flexible (albeit clunky) attributes for menu items so I can imagine an attribute on a menu directing compatible browsers to the markdown version of the menu, but allowing old clients to just view the traditional menu. This kinda relegates the gopher menu to a sort of old school directory listing type things we used to see in HTTP, but there is room for some fanciness via gopher+ to style menus themselves if browsers support that too! All of this is possible in Gopher+ if clients support it (...and there is an appetite for it). Perhaps we need some sort of "agreement"/Python-PIP-style thing to define sets of common Gopher+ attributes for all of this sort of thing.
- makeworld 6y ago
  You might be interested in Gemini! https://gemini.circumlunar.space/ https://gemini.circumlunar.space/

jl6 6y ago

I hope you are aware of Gemini which aims to do exactly that?

hliyan 6y ago

I sometimes wonder if the web would have been a better place had CSS and everything but the most basic HTML tags didn't exist.

berniemadoff69 6y ago
yes

tdeck 6y ago

But also no hyperlinks, no mixing text with images, and no unicode support in the menus.

mattlondon 6y ago
I think there is probably a lot of mileage that can be gained serving markdown over gopher with embedded gopher:// hyperlinks and images and utf8 and everything else markdown supports via gopher itself. Gopher0 already has sort-of support for HTML file types so this would not be such a wild divergence from the original design. Not serving HTML provides some basic guarantees (no JavaScript, no tracking pixelsnetc) Gopher+ allows for quite flexible (albeit clunky) attributes for menu items so I can imagine an attribute on a menu directing compatible browsers to the markdown version of the menu, but allowing old clients to just view the traditional menu. This kinda relegates the gopher menu to a sort of old school directory listing type things we used to see in HTTP, but there is room for some fanciness via gopher+ to style menus themselves if browsers support that too! All of this is possible in Gopher+ if clients support it (...and there is an appetite for it). Perhaps we need some sort of "agreement"/Python-PIP-style thing to define sets of common Gopher+ attributes for all of this sort of thing.
makeworld 6y ago
You might be interested in Gemini! https://gemini.circumlunar.space/ https://gemini.circumlunar.space/