(proposal) on metadata in documents

[Philip Linde]

On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 19:41:47 +0000 (UTC)
smlckz at tilde.pink wrote:

> We don't want or need anything like that. That is a breaking change to the spec so breaks all existing clients.

How so? My client will never interpret such meta-data, and I see the
lack of provisions for it in text/gemini as a feature, but I don't see
how adding it would break my client. To my client, it's regular text
lines in the document body.

The main advantage of this proposal is that the spec really doesn't need
to be concerned with it. It's still text/gemini and there are no
changes to the protocol. That makes it a great honeypot. Hopefully,
most future suggestions for changes to the protocol can instead be
added to an evergrowing list of in-document header fields that no one
will implement.

-- 
Philip
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20201116/8397e6ff/attachment.sig>