Re: [gopher] Question

[Kevin Veroneau <kevin@veroneau.net>]

I'm sorry Kim but that's not a good explanation to someone who knows HTTP server.  These days most HTTP servers including Apache provide directory views.

Here is my personal distinction and why I like using Gopher.  Gopher is more similar to FTP than it is to HTTP.  Gopher is like a power user's FTP server.  Where FTP falls flat, gopher shines.  FTP cannot perform database queries, remote searches, run server-side code, or accept input from the user.  Sure a custom built FTP server could be made to query a database, but it cannot request a string of text from the user.

Gopher is also vastly more lightweight than the likes of HTTP.  Gopher doesn't use headers or content types.  Gopher is overall a much simpler protocol to implement and can be used to say fetch lightweight status reports and logs from a server.  I use Gopher to view server logs without needing to configure and run either a full fledged HTTP or FTP server.  And since there are clients on mobile, it's a cinch to read this info.

To me, Gopher still has it's place and I feel it's way under used for what it can do in this day and age.

On February 11, 2015 2:32:24 PM MST, Kim Holviala <kim@holviala.com> wrote:

 On 11 Feb 2015, at 17:29, NN NN <aepedia@yandex.ru> wrote:
 
 For what reasons is Gopher needed if there are FTP and HTTP?


FTP provides directories but no hyperlinks. HTTP provides hyperlinks but no directories. Gopher provides both hyperlinks and directories combining both FTP and HTTP. Of course no one uses Gopher, but that’s another story :-) 



- Kim





Gopher-Project mailing list
Gopher-Project@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gopher-project

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Gopher-Project mailing list
Gopher-Project@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gopher-project