Proposal: Rabbits in gemtext

[Alex // nytpu]

I physically cannot create content on gemini without the ability to
insert ascii art of a rabbit arbitrarily in gemtext. I *demand* that
gemtext be amended to support both inline and standalone rabbits
posthaste. There is no humanly possible way for me to ever make anything
on gemini until this is implemented. It's not like I could be out
writing meaningful content on gemini instead of writing incessant emails
to the list, that's crazy talk.


The proposal:
A inline rabbit is indicated with the unicode string U+003a U+0072
U+0430 U+0062 U+0062 U+0069 U+03a4 U+003a (":rаbbiΤ:") appearing
anywhere on the line. Even though it is literally impossible for the
majority of users to type, who really types text out manually anymore?
Copying and pasting is the future.

A "standalone" rabbit is delimited by the unicode string U+003b U+0072
U+0430 U+0062 U+0069 U+03a4 U+003b (";rаbbiΤ;") appearing on it's own
line. Why is it different from an inline rabbit? Well gemtext isn't
designed to be easy to parse, it's not the spec writers' job to make it
easier on the developers. I've never ever written useful gemini software
myself, so it's not like it bothers me anyways!

What do you mean I can use stuff that already exists in gemini to add
ascii art of rabbits? The preformatted text block was really ambiguous
(i.e. I couldn't understand it), as it doesn't explain what
"preformatted" means, and I couldn't be bothered to look at the first
result on any search engine to find the meaning. Since I just don't like
the existing options, this MUST be implemented by all clients
immediately and the existing preformatted text toggles MUST be removed
from all implementations, because I never use them which means they are
useless.

Before you go crying with your worthless arguments like "it doesn't
provide provide enough benefit to justify the technical and manpower
cost of implementing it," it is important to not look at the technical
aspects of this. You're not supposed to look at the technical
considerations of implementing something when amending a fundamentally
technical internet protocol's formal specification, instead you should
look at the morals of it. On that front, if solderpunk doesn't
immediately add this change to the spec that means that he is
discriminating against everyone that likes rabbits, and that anyone who
gives well reasoned arguments on why this is a bad change will be judged
the same as hitler in the history books. Don't believe me? Look at this
random article that isn't even related to my argument in all but the
most surface level:
https://www.nytpu.com/files/really-really-really-really-really-really-long-url.html


An important thing to note before replying:
If anyone disagrees with me, instead of providing well reasoned
counterarguments I will instead resort to repeating already refuted
arguments, ad hominem, and by moving the goalposts. I will also
deliberately misunderstand and ignore your argument to make it easier
for me to strawman.

-- 
Alex // nytpu
alex at nytpu.com
GPG Key: https://www.nytpu.com/files/pubkey.asc
Key fingerprint: 43A5 890C EE85 EA1F 8C88 9492 ECCD C07B 337B 8F5B
https://useplaintext.email/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20201214/9c7d3558/attachment.sig>