💾 Archived View for idiomdrottning.org › re-article-conventions captured on 2021-12-05 at 23:47:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-03)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I am thinking that trying to adapt the style of writing to one specific client that is overwhelmingly popular […] might end up being the next <marquee>
Yeah. We need to keep being careful there. Inline images is another such feature which on the early web quickly came to replace text since you could choose your favorite fonts, colors, shadows etc. It was a bad time all around. (Not that I hate color but because it made the pages more difficult to interact with accessibly.)
I have kind of an excuse to doing this myself, as I am using this structure to partially replace metadata that I would embed into, e.g. an org-mode document, when doing some processing for things like the automatic directory program and the atom feed maker.
I do use the initial # line in my scripts to snag a title but it then puts it into the metadata and that’s what I store in my stack. So I can put pages in there that break the # convention, I just can’t use my normal convenience script. Same goes for dates; it checks the timestamp when I run that first import script, but then it’s stored in metadata instead of relying on the vagaries of rsync -azHX and Unix timestamps.
(None of that “stack” talk is to gatekeep or dissuade anyone from simply jamming some gemtext somewhere and calling it a day. That’s awesome, just write! I just at one point had fun nerding out about this stuff.)