💾 Archived View for gemini.bunburya.eu › newsgroups › gemini › messages › t73id3$9pa$1@dont-email.me… captured on 2022-06-04 at 01:40:25. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2022-07-16)

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

Re: Intend to standardize via RFC?

Message headers

From: Sean Conner <spc@lucy.roswell.conman.org>

Subject: Re: Intend to standardize via RFC?

Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 23:01:56 -0000 (UTC)

Message-ID: <t73id3$9pa$1@dont-email.me>

Message content

Dan Luedtke <d@x.gl> wrote:

Are there efforts underway to standardize Gemini via IETF RFC?

If there is, it's flying way under the radar.

Gemini the protocol and gemtext the file format are currently in a single
specification. Furthermore, the specification is a bit blurry around the edges
as Stephane Bortzmeyer pointed out a while ago. I've read various opinions
regarding TOFU and certificate change/renewal.. Embarking on the route to RFC
could improve the specification without changing its simplicity.
What's the sentiment regarding a clearer specification?

If my experience in Gemini is anything to go by, it's not going to happen.

Solderpunk has basically disappeared, and his appointed assistant resigned

after a few months. I'm not saying the project is dead, but further

clarifications of the protocol and text format probably is.

-spc

Related

Parent:

Intend to standardize via RFC? (by Dan Luedtke <d@x.gl> on Mon, 30 May 2022 02:49:03 -0000 (UTC))

Children:

Re: Intend to standardize via RFC? (by dunne <degrowther@protonmail.com> on Tue, 31 May 2022 01:34:23 -0000 (UTC))