On May 24, 2013 11:44 AM, "Nick" <suckless-...@njw.me.uk> wrote: > > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 08:04:16AM +0200, Dmitrij Czarkoff wrote: > > Sanitized HTTP could do. 9p and gopher could do as well. > > No, gopher sucks a lot. Seriously. Look at how its menu / index > system works. It's interesting historically, and there are a few > interesting gopher sites out there, but if we wanted to replace the > web with a different hypertext infrastructure gopher would be a > crappy option. > > I feel like the only people who say "gopher ftw" are those who > haven't created content for it. > > markdown over http would be far, far preferable.
Well, I meant the networking part of gopher, not its menu system. BTW it would be nice to have some syntax-free menu system for the web to avoid the nightmarish onsite navigation one may find on every other site out there. Hyperlinks still are needed though. That said, I never actually tried to make any serious use of gopher (not to mention content creation), so I may be misunderstanding it. But even if there is no protocol better then HTTP, it doesn't necessarily mean that HTTP is OK. ---- Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
