Almaember almaember at disroot.org
Sat Jun 19 13:05:24 BST 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Normally, I prefer being staying out of stupid arguments, but this email just has so much bullshit that I cannot not respond.
Neither is javascript. Additionally, again, you have to look at the pros and cons of things. Javascript adds significant performance and security problems. Compression **doesn't**.
So are you OK, with PDF and postscript that you left out?
If I say that I love a person, does that imply I don't love anybody else? People don't always list everything.
Let's look at an lz4 library:
https://github.com/lz4/lz4
It's 49000 MB/s on a Core i7-9700K CPU @ 4.9GHz.
And it's 5699 LOC.
Btw, this is the approach that Solderpunk used to determine what should go into the protocol. It's right on the front page of the gemini capsule:
"Strives for maximum power to weight ratio"
Yes, please reread the FAQ. Compression is not in the standard for reasons.And nobody is saying it should be, we are simply debating a separate file format for compressed gemtext. Nobody said anything about the protocol.
which seems more like the approach Lagrange takes (Skyjake can
correct me if I'm wrong).
Please this is not the place to discuss a single implementation for
gemini standard.
Passing things off to other applications is just as valid of a way to deal with this, and it's what AV-98 and various other clients do.
But you prefer a full gemini browser, right? And clients *should*
implement a form of decompression one way or another, right?What exactly is wrong with advocating for something?
I in no way proposed an extension to the protocol. In fact, I proposed the exact opposite, that this should stay *out* of the protocol, and be in client applications for people who want to support this:
"I do want to note that the gemini protocol doesn't care about what's send over it. This is why mimetypes were added to the protocol. You can send any binary data over gemini. This is why compression doesn't need to be in the main protocol - because you can send over the compressed stuff just as any other binary file can."
People are smart enough to decide for themselves what client they want to use. I'm allowed to promote a client. I think it's very presumptuous to think I'm somehow "propagandizing" people into supporting Lagrange. It's ridiculous. People are smart enough to decide for themselves what client they want to use.
i like lagrange a lot, this is neither about lagrange nor about
compression, this is about pushing for complex client that could break
the geminispace.It's not gonna break the geminispace, as long as clients have the capability to simply dedicate that functionality to an external software, which is absolutely possible with this suggestion.
-- Unless you're replying to me on the Gemini mailing list,reply to almaember at almaember.com instead.
Website: https://almaember.com/Gemini capsule: gemini://almaember.com/IRC: almaember on Libera.chat and tilde.chat