💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 004639.gmi captured on 2024-02-05 at 11:23:11. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

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

[tech] default response?

Katarina Eriksson gmym at coopdot.com

Fri Jan 1 06:07:09 GMT 2021

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This is low priority for [spec] but we should rephrase parts of theappendix before finalizing.

Omar Polo <op at omarpolo.com> wrote:

Petite Abeille <petite.abeille at gmail.com> writes:

On Dec 30, 2020, at 11:58, Omar Polo <op at omarpolo.com> wrote:

So it isn't allowed by the spec and, personally, I don't see how

allowing single-digit response could be a good idea.

Right. So, no more 1 digit response code (i.e. generic success "2" use

to be a thing), and no more default content-type (i.e. text/gemini).

I recall reading a mail from solderpunk (or maybe was someone else)

regarding the fact that initially the codes were one digit only. Now

two are mandatory.

It's like you wrote.

While the appendix still refers to single-digit codes*, meaning the firstdigit of the two digit code, the server still needs to send at least afiller zero as the second digit in a minimal server.

The client can still ignore the second digit if it wants to.

) This might need some improvement in the phrasing of the spec. Referringto a code with two digits, where one of them is a filler, as a"single-digit code" is confusing if you don't know the history of theprotocol.

-- Katarina

-------------- next part --------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20210101/adb5a6af/attachment-0001.htm>