 | Return |
|
|
| ##29 2018-07-24(Tue)10:10:27 (archived 2019-10-05(Sat)20:37:45) |
| _____________________________________________________________________ |
| Can Gopher do everything the Web does? |
| _____________________________________________________________________ |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)10:15:07 #238]______________________________________ |
| The Gopher protocol is often compared with the Web, and there |
| have been people experimenting on gopherspace with things that are |
| reminiscent on the web. There are chans, phlogs, phikis, etc. But |
| can gopher really do what the Web can? |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)10:15:27 #239]______________________________________ |
| And what are Gopher's limitations? |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)10:44:20 #240]______________________________________ |
| Gopher is like the GET portion of HTTP. It is designed for users |
| to query and find information, but not really to submit/edit data. |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)11:14:52 #241]______________________________________ |
| It's hard to say because the Web is a mix of multiple |
| technologies. You can serve HTML/CSS/JS/Flash/etc over Gopher |
| too. And the protocol is agnostic enough that you *can* emulate most |
| of what the Web does, but whether you *should* is a different matter. |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)14:08:21 #242]______________________________________ |
| @241 Okay, but how do you mean about the Web being multiple |
| technologies if its just HTTP and HTML? And if things like CSS and |
| Flash is implemented on Gopher, how would they look like? |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)15:21:17 #243]______________________________________ |
| @242 HTTP, HTML, CSS, JS, are multiple, distinct things that make |
| up "The Web". And they would look the same. You don't have to |
| "implement" them, a Gopher response can contain any kind of data, |
| its up to the client to make sense of it. |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)15:25:09 #244]______________________________________ |
 | HTML page with CSS and JS |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)15:43:33 #245]______________________________________ |
| To quickly compare gopher with HTTP: an HTTP request/response has: |
| 1. The method (GET, POST...) 2. The selector (/some/page.html) |
| 3. Headers (Host: foobar.com, Content-type: text/html), 4. The |
| body. A gopher request is only #2 and a response is only #4. |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)15:46:47 #246]______________________________________ |
| There is only one "method", and the server doesn't send any |
| info like "Content-type: text/html" (i.e. telling the client |
| how to render the data), that is encoded in the link to the data |
| (e.g. gopher://khzae.net/1/chan, the 1 means "display as a menu") |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)15:49:02 #247]______________________________________ |
 | If you change that character, the client will handle it differently |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)18:22:53 #248]______________________________________ |
| I see. How would CSS ans JavaScript would work on a gophermap, |
| not HTML. How would Flash and video look like on Gopher? |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)23:33:58 #249]______________________________________ |
| Technically the "gophermap" doesn't exist (to the client), it is |
| translated in to a gopher menu. And I don't know of any attempts |
| to mix CSS or JS with a gopher menu. TBH I wouldn't want that, |
| I like that "style" is uniform and up to the client in gopher |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)23:36:25 #251]______________________________________ |
 | Here's a video someone posted in /misc/ |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)23:38:16 #252]______________________________________ |
| Most gopher clients probably won't play it inside them, but hand |
| it off to a video player application or simply download it. But |
| if you view it over this server's HTTP gateway (which is a sort of |
| special gopher client), it should play in your web browser |
|
|
| __[2018-07-24(Tue)23:38:44 #253]______________________________________ |
 | HTTP gateway version |
|
|
| __[2018-07-25(Wed)12:43:13 #254]______________________________________ |
| It can do everything useful that the web does... |
|
|
| __[2018-11-06(Tue)13:22:09 #343]______________________________________ |
| At 254: Gopher still doesn't have anything close to Amazon. If |
| they had a marketplace (doubtful as it conflicts with Gopher's |
| non-commercial nature), I would likely abandon most of the WWW. |
|
|
| __[2019-03-29(Fri)12:14:31 #418]______________________________________ |
| I hope that gopher does not turn into another www. |
|
|
| __[2019-04-09(Tue)13:38:08 #427]______________________________________ |
| interesting |
|
|
| __[2019-04-27(Sat)12:24:04 #440]______________________________________ |
| ><> J |
|
|
| __[2019-05-27(Mon)19:09:00 #455]______________________________________ |
| If you want Web3.0 faggotry you know where to find it. If text |
| shitposting isn't good enough for you you should go outside. Fags |
| wanting muh 300MB swfs and 100 more MB of JS on their personal |
| pages just to display shitty emo poetry killed the web. |
|
|
| __[2019-07-26(Fri)08:33:45 #513]______________________________________ |
| Gopher is super fast over Tor, while bloated websites take forever |
| to load. Tor and gopher were made for each other. |
|
|