[SPEC] Backwards-compatible metadata in Gemini
oliversimmo at gmail.com
Tue Feb 23 20:32:20 GMT 2021
On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 at 19:09, <nothien at uber.space> wrote:
> # Metadata for Presentation
Metadata is NOT for presentation.
> # Metadata for the Document
> What's the /point/ of standardizing a format for providing metadata
> about a document? Seriously, I don't understand. What's the benefit of
> letting a client know who the author is? If you, an author, want users
> to know that you wrote something, just write "I wrote this". These
> kinds of proposals are unnecessary.
Myself I've more been thinking of the how and not the why with this,
and I apologise for that.
Most of the examples given here are pretty pointless for clients,
nobody has suggested any uses for metadata other than to replace the
favicon thing, author, and the "when" of the document.
The only major uses I can think of is for orbits (webrings), and it
would help search engines.
It's pretty pointless.
> Read the spec, read the FAQ, read the companion
> documents, read the mailing list, and /understand/ the spirit of Gemini.
I would hope everyone here has.
> We have over 200 individual pieces of software which use Gemini in its current state.
> This makes Gemini /very/ resistant to change, because we don't have the
> manpower to update all of that software. This is why the spec is now in
> a near-freeze state - all we want to do now is make clarifications to
> the existing spec and to not add new things.
All existing software would still work. This is only an addition.
About the freezing, I got the impression it was only the protocol that
On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 at 19:23, Julien Blanchard <julien at typed-hole.org> wrote:
> We should always consider underpowered devices, screen readers, people with a slow internet connection. I know TLS is already a burden for some of these cases so let’s not add more data to transfer.
I don't see how adding a few lines would cause much of an issue?
More information about the Gemini