✈個展 jetkoten at gmail.com
Thu May 21 22:28:19 BST 2020
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I think what Martin is saying is some of what I was trying to convey atwith my "gemini-fmt idea" proposal on another thread… that Gemini contentauthors run their texts through a spec conforming tool before a text everreaches the servers and clients of Geminispace.
Whatever combination of CR, LF or CR LF is in the pre-conformed text itwill be correct when it gets on the server and correct when it gets to theclient if run through such a tool.
The people who are writing the server and client software are doing a hugeservice to the Gemini community, so please don't saddle them with theadmittedly tedious work of writing code to check in the server and thencheck again in the client if it is an improper combination of CR, LF or CRLF and then even more code to re-conform it. That kind of thing reallyseems to go against the 100 lines of code, code it in a weekend Geminispirit in my opinion.
Thanks for your consideration.
J
On Thu, May 21, 2020, 16:18 Martin Keegan <martin at no.ucant.org> wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2020, solderpunk wrote:
We basically need to choose between forcing server authors to normalise
all endings to CRLF or forcing client authors to recgonise LF (even
though it'll probably never be seen in the wild).
Could we have a bit of a breather to allow the implications to sink in,
and, critically, to allow the development of conformance testing tools?
If there were a tool which could be run on a document, that confirmed that
it was conformant, and a similar tool for server behaviour, and people
had had some time to try to integrate these with the existing
software, it'd be easier to assess the tradeoffs involved in the spec
decision.
Mk
--
Martin Keegan, +44 7779 296469, @mk270, https://mk.ucant.org/
-------------- next part --------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20200521/a6c3faea/attachment.htm>