💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 007509.gmi captured on 2023-09-28 at 16:20:58. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Andrew Singleton singletona082 at gmail.com
Wed Nov 3 13:08:47 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I'm reminded of the guy that went 'the internet is shit. return to PDF' and everyone else just
'PDF is terrible for a long list of reasons.'
So I ask now the same question as then without further rhetoric. 'Why?'
On 11/3/21 8:05 AM, Devin Prater wrote:
Do we have to go PDF? Oh dear God. Okay if they're textual in nature,
sure. But you know someone is gonna start uploading scans. I mean
people can do that in HTML kinda, but thankfully it's harder to do.
Devin Prater
r.d.t.prater at gmail.com <mailto:r.d.t.prater at gmail.com>
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 9:35 AM DJ Chase <u9000 at posteo.mx > <mailto:u9000 at posteo.mx>
wrote:
On Mon, 2021-11-01 at 12:41 +0100, Alex Schroeder wrote:
I’d say no. The functionality of Gemini is pretty much done.
Also, that's not line-oriented.
People are of course free to write their own clients that do
their own
processing. But the standard is: if you need that, serve Markdown or
HTML documents instead of extending Gemtext.
Side note: I think it's best to serve PDFs instead of other markup
languages because everyone can view PDFs. Many people don't have a
markdown viewer/compiler installed, and serving HTML is, in my
opinion,
overkill for Gemini.
--
DJ Chase
They, Them, Theirs
-- -----http://singletona082.flounder.onlinegemini://singletona082.flounder.onlineMy online presence
-------------- next part --------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20211103/04083543/attachment.htm>