💾 Archived View for gemi.dev › gemini-mailing-list › 000465.gmi captured on 2024-08-31 at 17:11:55. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2023-12-28)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Hi folks! as there has been a discussion about freezing the specs i wonder if the gemini file format could be changed as discussed in this message (in this thread actually): gemini://gemi.dev/gemini-mailing-list/messages/002312.gmi I have read people wondering if a space is needed after "#" here and there and if there is agreement on the conclusions in the message above now is, in my opinion, a good time to amend the specs. Bye! C.
November 12, 2020 9:59 AM, "cage" <cage-dev at twistfold.it> wrote: > Hi folks! > > as there has been a discussion about freezing the specs i wonder if > the gemini file format could be changed as discussed in this message > (in this thread actually): > > gemini://gemi.dev/gemini-mailing-list/messages/002312.gmi > > I have read people wondering if a space is needed after "#" here and > there and if there is agreement on the conclusions in the message > above now is, in my opinion, a good time to amend the specs. > > Bye! > C. I'm not a big fan of *requiring* whitespace after the hash. Markdown, for instance, doesn't require whitespace. That being said, in lieu of an escape character, it would make more sense. Regardless, I would throw the eternal refrain of the ML back at it on this one: "Work within the limitations of the spec, instead of trying to change the spec." Just my two cents, Robert "khuxkm" Miles
November 12, 2020 9:59 AM, "cage" <cage-dev at twistfold.it> wrote: > Hi folks! > > as there has been a discussion about freezing the specs i wonder if > the gemini file format could be changed as discussed in this message > (in this thread actually): > > gemini://gemi.dev/gemini-mailing-list/messages/002312.gmi > > I have read people wondering if a space is needed after "#" here and > there and if there is agreement on the conclusions in the message > above now is, in my opinion, a good time to amend the specs. > > Bye! > C. I support the required space after each of the line types, which it appears that Solderpunk agrees with according to the archive message linked in this thread. Having watched that conversation play out some time back, I think I remember someone pointing out that requiring the space for headers would make it possible to include #hashtags on their own line without any prefix characters. It would be good if Solderpunk could go ahead and clarify this point in the spec once and for all. My 2c, Gary -- GPG Key ID: 7BC158ED Use `gpg --search-keys lambdatronic' to find me Protect yourself from surveillance: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org ======================================================================= () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments Why is HTML email a security nightmare? See https://useplaintext.email/ Please avoid sending me MS-Office attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
I also support requiring the space, because it's a pretty simple change that makes the document format and interpretation more strict. However, to preserve the ability to use the first three characters to identify the interpretation of a line, it should be required that "###", with or without a space, is interpreted as a heading.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 12:37 PM Drew DeVault <sir at cmpwn.com> wrote: I also support requiring the space, because it's a pretty simple change > that makes the document format and interpretation more strict. > What happened to "Don't change the spec"? As written it is very clear: a line beginning with "#" is a heading, and it can take one of three forms: "#" + optional whitespace + heading text, "##" + optional whitespace + heading text, or "###" + optional whitespace + heading text. It is the heading text that should be displayed: whether the rest of the line is kept is completely up to the client. So the six cases "#foo", "##foo", "###foo", "# foo", "## foo", "### foo" (and so on for more spaces) all have the same heading text. Disallowing the first three cases is a backwards-incompatible change. In addition, presumably you would want to disallow "# foo" (two spaces) as well, which is an even more backwards-incompatible change. John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org Tautology is something that is tautological. --Francois-Rene Rideau -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20201113/1039 a9fa/attachment-0001.htm>
I've never really said "Don't change the spec", at least as far as I'm aware. I'm against the introduction of new features. Clarifications and refinements of the existing specification would be valuable.
Okay, my bad. But why is the spec in need of clarification here? On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 1:06 PM Drew DeVault <sir at cmpwn.com> wrote: > I've never really said "Don't change the spec", at least as far as I'm > aware. I'm against the introduction of new features. Clarifications and > refinements of the existing specification would be valuable. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20201113/a22d 663a/attachment.htm>
---