Greetings. On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:44:50 +0200 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.
A combination out of gopher and markdown would be more preferable. The simple menu is used to have the information tree and markdown to have parseable content. But as mentioned below in the thread does gopher have its flaws too, which corporate users will require to ruin user’s life. I’m with [0], but it hasn’t been implemented or written down yet. Sincerely, Christoph Lohmann [0] http://http02.cat-v.org/
