Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.1.20020917223031.00a09830@um1b.pce.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:10:46 +0200
To: gopher@complete.org
From: Wolfgang Zekoll <wzk@happy-ent.de>
Subject: [gopher] Re: Encouraging MIME types
In-Reply-To: <200209162155.58117.hardburn@runbox.com>
References: <20020916023229.GB25785@complete.org>
 <200209142214.35897.hardburn@runbox.com>
 <20020916023229.GB25785@complete.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
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


I would neither stop gopher0 extension nor drop gopher0 (in parts or
complete) to go for gopher+.

Why?  I expect running and maintaining a gopher0 server is simpler
than doing the same with a gopher+ server and gopher+ features.

But this is only on side.  Programming a gopher0 client or server is
also simplier than going directly for gopher+.  So if someone would
come up with nice ideas and/or features for gopher0, perhaps with
demand for new gopher0 types he would most probably get my full
support (working with new gopher0 types is what I do sometimes in my
client).

To the current question regarding the m-type and the use of MIME-types:
I don't have nothing against it but I also do not see the feature, I
don't know why I should really care about it.

One additional thing: going for gopher+.  As I understand gopher+ it's
not the solution, it's a framework for extensions.  The suggested MIME
types are no problem with gopher+, the real question is the 'how'?
gopher+ defines only the format of gopher+ blocks but not their content
and not their interpretation.  gopher+ features can be only put into a
client if there's is at least one server (read 'server software') that
supports them.  But on the other side you need clients.  And here I come
back to the above: Looking if a feature is working, developing a gopher
client is easier for gopher0.

At the end I have a question: what is our (or your personal vision) for
a native gopher client (either 0 or +)?

For my own gopher client project it's first to have a program that works
as a directory browser in today's Internet with integration for external
programs (see latest release).  But this is something I'm still working
on (by the way, the next step for this will implement a new gopher0 type
for external links).

After that I plan to think about turning gopher into a simple ASCII dialog
system (edit the current text file, then send it back to the server).

Just my personal opinion.

Regards,

Wolfgang Zekoll