More silly text/gemini spec proposals

[Sean Conner]

It was thus said that the Great solderpunk once stated:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 09:56:44AM -0400, Jason McBrayer wrote:
>  
> > On the web, they make sense as a way of inlining short content, like
> > icons, and avoiding a server round-trip. But obviously, they don't make
> > sense for Gemini, and there's no reason clients should support them.
> 
> There's no reason they *should*, but they can.  And some of them will.
> And then people will think of this as normal and expect it and design
> their documents around it, and the snowball will roll...
> 
> I tried *so* hard to avoid this, but you just can't.  This data:// URL
> thing is a monster.  No RFC puts a limit on the allowed length of a URL.

  RFC-2397 (The "data" URL scheme) states (section 2):

   The "data:" URL scheme is only useful for short values. Note that
   some applications that use URLs may impose a length limit; for
   example, URLs embedded within <A> anchors in HTML have a length limit
   determined by the SGML declaration for HTML [RFC1866]. The LITLEN
   (1024) limits the number of characters which can appear in a single
   attribute value literal, the ATTSPLEN (2100) limits the sum of all
   lengths of all attribute value specifications which appear in a tag,
   and the TAGLEN (2100) limits the overall length of a tag.

So there are, in fact, limits.  

  -spc