💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 000375.gmi captured on 2020-11-07 at 01:26:47. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2020-09-24)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

<-- back to the mailing list

Text reflow woes (or: I want bullets back!)y

Aaron Janse aaron at ajanse.me

Sat Jan 18 19:20:10 GMT 2020

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ```

I think we made an oversight: syntax nested within quotes.

For example:

It looks like things are moving along, I wonder if we forgot anything
that would make us need to read more than three chars to specify the
line type?
Here's a site to demo gemini's syntax:
=
gemini://example.com Gemini Syntax Demo
In the future, we can add the following features:
* foo
* bar

Client: *doesn't know to make quoted link clickable* *doesn't know to fancy-render the quoted list*```

---

Regardless, here are my thoughts on everything else...

I definitely love:

Changes I think we should make to the spec spec, based on what I've readhere and my own opinion:

Are we really limited to a max depth of three? Even if we allow unlimiteddepth of headers and lists, clients would only need to read the first twochars of a line to determine its type (unless we add horizontal rules,in which case we'd need to read three characters).

Hmm. I would want to think a bit before I lay down a hard statement on
this because I don't want to impose too much of my own ideology on
Gemini, as it's supposed to be a general-purpose tool....but I am not
excited by verbatim dragging of mainstream web 2.0 cultural concepts
like comment threads into Gemini.

Well, worst case scenario, if someone really badly wants comment threads,maybe they could use nested quote blocks (assuming we figure that out).

Cheers!