When making proxy that display gemini
sites as gopherholes, I've noticed
that result is more consistent than
regular gopher. In some way it's like
high level language compiled or
translated to low-level instructions.
So you have to write less and missing
a lot of possibilities to break things
What have Gemini done better
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These features could've been done in
Gopher, or exist in rudimentary form
or in Gopher+ spec
* error handling
* document+links instead of separated
menu for navigation and docs, or
non-spec mixed menu
* files interpreted by server response,
not link client used
* virtual hosts / routing by domain
name
* redirects
* relative links
* unicode
What have Gemini added
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* encryption
although it's most controversial
feature of protocol IMO, it's
something that adds value to it
What do I still miss in Gemini
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* inline embeddings
* images/graphs
* "nested documents"
* protocol features
* HEAD-like method, i.e. ability to
get metadata before actually
loading data
* ability to use as streaming
protocol
* ranged download (related to 2
previous)
* probably explicit version spec
* user interaction
* one-stage input
* file upload
* easier access control
* non-encrypted option
