humble suggestions to specs documentation

[solderpunk]

On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 06:33:57PM +0200, cage wrote:
> Hi!

Howdy!

> I  find  gemini very  exciting,  bringing  back  some fun  in  network
> programming!

Happy to hear it! :)

> 1.3.1
> 
> Gemini response headers look like this:
> 
> <STATUS> <META><CR><LF>
> 
> [...]
> 
> In my opinion the space character between <STATUS> and <META> could be
> a symbol not the character itself something like:
> 
> <STATUS><SPACE><META><CR><LF>
> 
> this  way it  is much  more difficult  that the  reader could  miss or
> misunderstand the single space in the response line.

This makes sense, I will make the change.
 
> I think would be a good idea to include some code snippets (maybe in C
> with libssl?) to illustrate how to do server validation or make client
> certificate.
> 
> I the code was  too long could be added in an  appendix or some code
> form an existing implementation can be linked, i do know.

I think code examples are beyond the scope of a specification, and would
be far too long if we tried to provide good coverage.  But I've thought
for a while now some kind of "implementer's guide" as a separate
document would be a good idea.  Specifically, it would be nice to have
code in many languages / libraries for setting up TLS 1.2 to use only
the more secure cipher suites.

> I think there is a minor typo in the FAQ:
> 
> ### 1.3 Where can I learn more?
> 
> [...]
> 
> Official discussion regarding Gemini hapens on a mailing list.
> 
> [...]
> 

Fixed!

> Bye and thank you for gemini!

Thanks for taking the time to make these suggests.

Cheers,
Solderpunk