💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 005600.gmi captured on 2024-02-05 at 11:09:05. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
peteyboy at sdf.org peteyboy at sdf.org
Wed Feb 24 21:31:56 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Hah, we need like a "why doesn't Gemini * FAQ" and a "why doesn't gemtext include * FAQ"
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 08:32:30 -0500
From: Jason McBrayer <jmcbray at carcosa.net>
To: gemini at lists.orbitalfox.eu
Subject: Re: [SPEC] Backwards-compatible metadata in Gemini
Message-ID: <87czwpa8wh.fsf at cassilda.carcosa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
nothien at uber.space writes:
I'm just going to quickly address everything about the metadata ideas
/ proposals:
They're not necessary.
Hear, hear.
# Conclusion
Please stop.
Agreed. Or, at the very least, read every last metadata discussion in
the list archive, and understand why those discussions ended in the
proposed convention not being adopted *before* posting yet another
proposed convention.
-- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.