On Sun Nov 29, 2020 at 4:54 PM EST, wrote: > What is the issue with scheme-less link lines? These are perfectly valid, > and any client with a good URL parsing library should support them. They > are already in use by authors, and are of particular importance to sites > that support bi-hosting on the Web and on Gemini, like flounder.online. > That way the links users make will work in both spaces automatically. > > I believe this part of the change should be reversed, and schemeless links > should be allowed. It is only the request part of the spec that was > previously ambiguous. > > I'm sorry for not bringing this up earlier, I misunderstood the earlier > discussion an did not realize that removing schemeless link support was on > the table. I agree. When I proposed this change, I mentioned that schemeless links should still work: gemini://gemi.dev/gemini-mailing-list/messages/003534.gmi > Linking to a URL without a scheme should still work. It would be up to > the client to resolve the URL reference before making the request. This > functionality should already be provided by whatever library the client > uses to handle relative URLs.
---
Previous in thread (5 of 27): 🗣️ colecmac (a) protonmail.com (colecmac (a) protonmail.com)
Next in thread (7 of 27): 🗣️ Luke Emmet (luke (a) marmaladefoo.com)