Message-ID: <3C682904.BF4BE07D@sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 15:26:44 -0500
From: Ralph Furmaniak <sugaku@sympatico.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gopher-L <gopher@complete.org>
Subject: [gopher] Gopher wishlist
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: gopher@complete.org


Do we really have to stick to the gopher+ specs?  There are some things
that could be done differently, or new features added to the protocol.
We have practically all the maintainers of maintained gopher progs in
this group so why can't we tinker with the protocol a bit?  If people
have some ideas of things they would like to see in gopher, we can try
to put these together.

For example we could allow actual linking to http servers, just like you
can link to telnet, ftp, and other resources.

Also, we could change around the ASK structure, some people were
talking/complaining about it earlier.

It would be nice if we could put in some redundant/backup/mirror server
capabilities, so the same resource could come from multiple servers.
Slashdot protection!

We could also put some information into headers, similarly to what http
does.  This would also be a good place to put in the server information
(abstracts?).  You could also request a specific chunk of a file, so
that you can resume failed downloads.

Any other ideas?