[tech] default response?

• 🗣️ From: Katarina Eriksson (gmym (a) coopdot.com)
• 📅 Sent: 2021-01-01 06:07
• 📧 Message 8 of 9

This is low priority for [spec] but we should rephrase parts of the
appendix before finalizing.

Omar Polo <op at omarpolo.com> wrote:

>
> Petite Abeille <petite.abeille at gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> On Dec 30, 2020, at 11:58, Omar Polo <op at omarpolo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> So it isn't allowed by the spec and, personally, I don't see how
> >> allowing single-digit response could be a good idea.
> >
> > Right. So, no more 1 digit response code (i.e. generic success "2" use
> to be a thing), and no more default content-type (i.e. text/gemini).
>
> I recall reading a mail from solderpunk (or maybe was someone else)
> regarding the fact that initially the codes were one digit only.  Now
> two are mandatory.
>

It's like you wrote.

While the appendix still refers to single-digit codes*, meaning the first
digit of the two digit code, the server still needs to send at least a
filler zero as the second digit in a minimal server.

The client can still ignore the second digit if it wants to.


	
) This might need some improvement in the phrasing of the spec. Referring

to a code with two digits, where one of them is a filler, as a
"single-digit code" is confusing if you don't know the history of the
protocol.

-- 
Katarina

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20210101/adb5
a6af/attachment-0001.htm>

---

Previous in thread (7 of 9): 🗣️ Petite Abeille (petite.abeille (a) gmail.com)

Next in thread (9 of 9): 🗣️ Petite Abeille (petite.abeille (a) gmail.com)

View entire thread.