An outsider's view of the `gemini://` protocol

[Bradley D. Thornton]

On 2/28/2020 2:04 AM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 11:07 AM Sean Conner <sean at conman.org> wrote:
>>   Why is a numeric status code so bad?  Yes, the rest of the protocol is
>> English centric (MIME types; left-to-right, UTF-8).  It just seems that
>> using words (regardless of language) is just complexity for its own sake.
> 
> 
> Why did people use `/etc/hosts` files before DNS was invented?  Why do
> we have `/etc/services`?  Why do we have `O_READ`?  Why do we have
> `chmod +x`?
> 
> Because numbers are hard to remember, and say nothing to a person that
> doesn't know the spec by heart.  (For example although I do a lot of
> HTTP related work with regard to routing and such, I always don't
> remember which of the 4-5 HTTP redirect codes says "temporary redirect
> but keep the same method" as "opposed to temporary redirect but switch
> to `GET`".)
> 

Well, section 1.3.2 of the Gemini spec-spec says two digit codes, but
single (first digit) is all that is required. So, a 2, a 20, and a 21
are all success and there's no ambituity as to anything occuring at the
first digit level, it's just more gravy with the second digit.

I do fail to see why what appears to me to be a whole lot of work to
implement what you suggest, especially considering that most servers
will invariably choose to implement their own custom handlers for
status/error codes, much like one does in Apache so the server operator
themselves gets to choose what content to deliver as a result of a 404.

So there would be added framework for human readable, non-numeric status
codes (I would rather read the numerical codes in my logfiles), and then
as Gemini matures and stabilizes, devs will build frameworks so the
server operators can and will devlop custom pages for the status codes
anyway. This seems, at best, somewhat redundant to me (ultimately).

A 5 (or 50) might not provide as complete a picture as one would like,
yet it's optional to serve the full digit code and still unambiguous
with respect of what's going on at the baseline - a permanent falure.

A 51 though, perhaps the most common user facing state where errors are
encountered, will certainly eventually be accommodated by some clever
little remark intended to amuse the user who just asked for something
that isn't there. Reinforcing my suggestion that the server operators
are going to want the devs to enable them to deliver cute little
messages during such fashion faux pas'.

That's just kinda what I was pondering while reading the exchange.

-- 
Bradley D. Thornton
Manager Network Services
http://NorthTech.US
TEL: +1.310.421.8268