Devin Prater r.d.t.prater at gmail.com
Sun Jul 11 15:10:13 BST 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Well, maybe Gemini browsers should add some of these other protocols so that users can do more, with better-suited things.Devin Praterr.d.t.prater at gmail.com
Https://devinprater.flounder.online
On Jul 11, 2021, at 6:49 AM, David Messer <davx8342 at gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 2021 at 07:30, ew.gemini <ew.gemini at nassur.net <mailto:ew.gemini at nassur.net>
wrote:
Apparently a lot of people think, but how can I make it do X or
Y too? And in my not so humble opinion, there are protocols
better suited for some or these things. Take "uploading" text.
There is sftp or scp at least. It requires an account on the
receiving side. Yes, well, imho that's a feature and not a
shortcoming. ymmv.
I don't think that's a bad thing, speaking for myself here I could immediately see the benefits of Gemini and I wanted to build things using it. Were they a good fit for Gemini? Maybe not, but at its heart text is the simplest of file types. Other protocols like NNTP and SMTP have long had ways of dealing with that. It's not unreasonable that people might expect Gemini to have a way of dealing with multi-line user-submitted text content.
I live ~5 miles from one of the poorest areas in the UK. The only devices people are likely to have access to are tablets or cell phones. SFTP is not so much fun on those types of devices or with users from demographics who maybe aren't old enough to remember having to FTP their content to a web server somewhere.
If all people want for Gemini is to use other protocols to upload content, that's absolutely fine. I'm not here to bash Gemini. Quite the opposite. People want to add layers on top of Gemini which maybe aren't such a good idea precisely because Gemini has highly desirable features.
davx
-------------- next part --------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20210711/86d09190/attachment-0001.htm>