More silly text/gemini spec proposals

[Sean Conner]

It was thus said that the Great plugd once stated:
> Jason McBrayer writes:
> > Can't we just say: "A spec-compliant client MUST NOT display data: URLs
> > inline; a client MAY treat data: URLs as links to media, to be opened
> > only on user request."?
> 
> While ideal, I think Postel's law will eventually bite you there -
> correctly formatted pages will render just fine without clients
> forbidding data: URLS, while incorrectly formatted pages will only work
> on clients technically violating the spec.
> 
> How about this: it's a bit of a hack, but imagine if we explicitly
> harnessed data URLs to do something vaguely useful?
> 
> e.g.
> 
> => data://a%20person%20dancing

  That's the incorrect format.  It should be:

=> data:text/plain,a%20person%20dancing

> ```
>   \o/
>    |
>   / \
> ```
> I know, I know, very silly - but _if_ there were a way to make data://
> URLs an indispensible part of text/gemini it would make it very
> difficult to abuse them without breaking things, wouldn't it?

  The issue is when someone does something like:

=> ...
```
   \o/
    |
   / \
```
  -spc