💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 005429.gmi captured on 2024-03-21 at 16:41:35. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Oliver Simmons oliversimmo at gmail.com
Mon Feb 22 10:24:55 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 at 07:57, Björn Wärmedal <bjorn.warmedal at gmail.com> wrote:
I've seen some people put key/value type metadata in their gmi files
already ("tags: this,that,whatevs" for example). Go ahead and do it if
you want; I personally like that you want to put them at the end of
the document, where they won't bother anybody.
As for including it in the spec... I'd rather not. Treat them as
optional extensions :)
The spec has "advanced line types" which are treated as optional:
5.5 Advanced line types
The following advanced line types MAY be recognised by advanced clients. Simple clients may treat them all as text lines as per 5.4.1 without any loss of essential function.
Having the format as part of the spec would be good, I don't thinkhaving an official list of key:values in the spec should be a thingthough, that should be separate.