Re: [gopher] Updated Gopher RFC
> > Trouble is there's a gazillion kinds of file and soon you end up with a
> > huge mess like mimetypes.
>
> Why do you think mime types are a mess? IMHO it's the only way to
> reliably tell the file type without analyzing the file itself. With one
> letter item types you won't get very far. Especially if you're
> restricted to 7-bit ascii or even any 8-bit encoding.
>
> I wonder what would happen if we added a m item type (as in mime-type)
> which has an additional TAB mime-type added at the end of the line. How
> many clients would break?
I actually proposed exactly this some time ago and it was unpopular for
some reason. Perhaps Nuno or John G remembers.
The only catch here is Gopher+ clients. If they object to *anything* being
there but a +, then we have a problem. If UMN digests it fine, I think we
could call that "standard."
But I would fully back an idea like this.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser@floodgap.com
-- In memory of Bruce Geller --------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gopher-Project mailing list
Gopher-Project@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gopher-project
Reply to: