💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 005390.gmi captured on 2023-11-14 at 10:08:02. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
ew.gemini ew.gemini at nassur.net
Sun Feb 21 09:54:02 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Hello CĂ´me,
CĂ´me Chilliet writes:
Le dimanche 21 février 2021, 08:28:23 CET ew.gemini a écrit :
I support the idea of not loading anything beyond what the user
asked. Thus no favicons.
But what if the user does ask for favicons?
I obviously wasn't clear enough. :)IFF the user asks for them, all is fine, imho.IFF the browser just does this behind my neck without my explicitconsent, then no thanks.The /automatic/ thing is, what bothers me.
I do not like the favicon specifications personaly, so I would not activate it if my browser adds support for it.
But I did add icons to most of my capsules for people who use it, and I feel forbidding such thing by specification is a strong overstepping of the specification.
I see Gemini as a protocol specification and feel like it should not overstep too much on how the protocol is used. Conventions and specifications based upon Gemini will happen even if you don’t want it.
I even host a list of such specifications here: gemini://gemlog.lanterne.chilliet.eu/specifications.en.gmi (Do not hesitate to send me missing ones)
CĂ´me
I'm well aware that monitoring the sizes and/or times ofdownloads leads to metadata useable for fingerprinting. Gettingrid of this kind of meta data (connection between A and Boccured Date-Time) is difficult.
Cheers,~ew
-- Keep it simple!-------------- next part --------------A non-text attachment was scrubbed...Name: signature.ascType: application/pgp-signatureSize: 861 bytesDesc: not availableURL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20210221/688996dc/attachment.sig>