On 29-Nov-2020 22:22, colecmac at protonmail.com wrote: > > [...] I take issue with two parts: >> Clients MAY treat schemeless links in text/gemini documents as errors > and > >> Authors of Gemini content or software which generates Gemini content >> MUST add explicit schemes to any schemeless links. > I think both of these changes are not great, as I explained in my original > email. It effectively disallows schemeless links in gemtext, which I'm > not in favour of. Ok - I'm following you now, and I think I agree about not needing this restriction in gemtext itself. on the first point, schemeless links of the form //authority/path in the gemtext are quite valid and will be mapped to gemini://authority/path in a gemini client and http://authority/path in a web client schemeless links of the form server.foo/path are not schemeless links, but rather relative paths with respect to the current URL. On the second point, gemtext generating software should allow for the //authority/path form of links. - Luke
---
Previous in thread (9 of 27): 🗣️ colecmac (a) protonmail.com (colecmac (a) protonmail.com)
Next in thread (11 of 27): 🗣️ John Cowan (cowan (a) ccil.org)