a space case for transparent gemtext compression

[cage]

On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 08:22:32AM -0500, Christian Seibold wrote:

Hi!

> Finally, the  other consideration is whether  supporting this within
> clients adds too much complexity. Personally,  I do not think so, as
> there are tons  of very simple libraries you can  use for supporting
> compression. Golang even has these in its standard library.

This is how bloated software starts.

>  Some gemini  browser maintainers are  probably going to  argue that
> it's not  the purpose  of a  browser to support  opening zips,  as a
> similar argument has  been used for Gemini  Subscription Feeds, Atom
> Feeds, audio/video  files, and  other such things.  I would  have to
> completely disagree. The point of a browser is to browse documents -
> that's the scope of gemini browsers.  I do recognize that there are,
> however, two different approaches to this. Have the "gemini browser"
> be a full document browser for  the gemini protocol, or have it just
> deal with the gemini protocol and  pass the documents off to another
> program. The problem, of course,  is many applications don't support
> gemini links, which is definitely why I prefer the 1st approach,

So are you  arguing that gemini client should include  a postscript or
PDF interpreter?  Supports HTML?  JavaScript?  There are libraries for
those in the most common languages.

> which  seems more  like  the approach  Lagrange  takes (Skyjake  can
>  correct me if I'm wrong).

Please this  is not the place  to discuss a single  implementation for
gemini standard.

The fact is  that or you are proposing a  standard extension, and just
let me  write that i am  tired that about  60% of the traffic  in this
mailing list is  about proposing extension to the  protocol that still
needs works  to be finalized, instead  of proposing fix (there  is the
gitlab  repo for  that).  If  you  do not  like gemini  propose a  new
protocol and  i likely be  the first  to works on  that if i  think is
good.  Or if  this is not extension  (and i disagree it is  not, to be
clear) it is a discussion  about a single implementation which produce
noise in this ml.

Moreover  i  think  that  promoting a  "fat"  client  promotes  client
mono culture as  well. Complicated clients need  more resources (people
or money) and lead to monopolistic behaviour (even in good faith).

To be  clear. No if  lagrange implements X  this does not  means every
other  client should  follows  the  same path.  In  my  opinion if  an
implementation  follows  the  path  you are  proposing  (bloating  the
software) this,  in my opinion,  is a  reason to not  implements those
(anti)features.

To reuse (badly) a  metaphor that is used often these  days, to me you
are  proposing tho  transform an  old  boring tree  that helps  people
meditating  with  a  shiny  Christmas  tree  with  colored  light  and
decoration which only purpose is to  remember us to spend our money in
the  commercial center  nearby  until  it is  disposed  of, after  the
season! :)

What, in my opinion, needs gemini  now is not extension but fixing the
standard, new contents  a lot of propaganda, i think  help of everyone
is appreciated.

Bye!
C.

PS: as usual, sorry for my bad English!