REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) This is a formal Request for Discussion
(RFD) for the creation of the unmoderated newsgroup:
comp.infosystems.gemini
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) This is a formal Request for Discussion
(RFD) for the creation of the unmoderated newsgroup:
comp.infosystems.gemini
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) This is a formal Request for Discussion^
(RFD) for the creation of the unmoderated newsgroup: comp.infosystems.gemini
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
comp.infosystems.gemini, Discussion about new gemini internet protocol
RATIONALE:
The Gemini community largely exists in the form of a mailing list. A >newsgroup would be a natural compliment to the existing mailing list as
well as a mirror for newsgroup messages.
This topic has already been proposed to the mailing list community with >positive results. See: >https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/2021/007227.html
CHARTER:
comp.infosystems.gemini is a forum for announcements and conversation
within the Gemini communitity. It is an unmoderated forum. Users are >encouraged to self-moderate via filters and kill files in their
newsreader software.
MODERATION POLICY: unmoderated
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) This is a formal Request for Discussion
(RFD) for the creation of the unmoderated newsgroup: comp.infosystems.gemini
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
comp.infosystems.gemini About a new internet protocol
RATIONALE:
The Gemini community largely exists in the form of a mailing list. A >newsgroup would be a natural compliment to the existing mailing list as
well as a mirror for newsgroup messages.
This topic has already been proposed to the mailing list community with >positive results. See: >https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/2021/007227.html
CHARTER:
comp.infosystems.gemini is a forum for announcements and conversation
within the Gemini communitity. It is an unmoderated forum. Users are >encouraged to self-moderate via filters and kill files in their
newsreader software.
MODERATION POLICY: unmoderated
noscript wrote:
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) This is a formal Request for Discussion
(RFD) for the creation of the unmoderated newsgroup:
comp.infosystems.gemini
I'm a member of this community also and would love to see a new newsgroup. created.
Do subscribers want to move their discussion to Usenet? Do they want to discuss on both the mailing list and Usenet? Can you find instances of
Gemini discussion taking place on Usenet?
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) This is a formal Request for Discussion
(RFD) for the creation of the unmoderated newsgroup:
comp.infosystems.gemini
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
comp.infosystems.gemini, Discussion about new gemini internet
protocol
RATIONALE:
The Gemini community largely exists in the form of a mailing list. A
newsgroup would be a natural compliment to the existing mailing list
as well as a mirror for newsgroup messages.
This topic has already been proposed to the mailing list community
with positive results. See: https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/2021/007227.html
CHARTER:
comp.infosystems.gemini is a forum for announcements and conversation
within the Gemini communitity. It is an unmoderated forum. Users are
encouraged to self-moderate via filters and kill files in their
newsreader software.
MODERATION POLICY: unmoderated
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) This is a formal Request for Discussion
(RFD) for the creation of the unmoderated newsgroup: comp.infosystems.gemini
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
comp.infosystems.gemini, Discussion about new gemini internet protocol
comp.infosystems.gemini, Discussion about new gemini internet protocol
If this is a protocol, should it be under comp.protocols.* instead?
Maybe comp.protocols.* is for lower-level protocols and other
sub-hierarchies like comp.infosystems.* have traditionally been used for application-level protocols. I see the update of the newsgroups line in
a later followup to the original RFD:
comp.infosystems.gemini Internet Protocol and Hypertext System
so possibly this is the best choice.
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 12:07:53 -0000 (UTC), Paul W. Schleck wrote:
comp.infosystems.gemini Internet Protocol and Hypertext System
Since comp.infosystems.gopher and comp.infosystems.www already exists,
that seems to be the best hierarchy for it.
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 12:07:53 -0000 (UTC), Paul W. Schleck wrote:
comp.infosystems.gemini, Discussion about new gemini internet protocol
If this is a protocol, should it be under comp.protocols.* instead?
Maybe comp.protocols.* is for lower-level protocols and other >>sub-hierarchies like comp.infosystems.* have traditionally been used for >>application-level protocols. I see the update of the newsgroups line in
a later followup to the original RFD:
comp.infosystems.gemini Internet Protocol and Hypertext System
so possibly this is the best choice.
Here's how the originators of Gemini describe it:
"Gemini is a new internet protocol which:
Is heavier than gopher
Is lighter than the web
Will not replace either
Strives for maximum power to weight ratio
Takes user privacy very seriously"
It is an internet protocol par with gopher or www. Since >comp.infosystems.gopher and comp.infosystems.www already exists, that
seems to be the best hierarchy for it.
What can be done to get the proponent to put a proper description in the group's charter, and a brief description on the Newsgroups file line,
that gives the rest of the Usenet community not already familiar with
the protocol some idea as to what it is?
On Tue, 05 Oct 2021 13:48:22 +0000, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
What can be done to get the proponent to put a proper description in the
group's charter, and a brief description on the Newsgroups file line,
that gives the rest of the Usenet community not already familiar with
the protocol some idea as to what it is?
Building on noscript's post from Sunday, let me have another try. Thanks.
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
comp.infosystems.gemini Internet Hypertext System, Privacy, Accessibility.
CHARTER:
This newsgroup covers the Gemini information space served via the Gemini >internet protocol, related concepts and tools created by its community.
Gemini is an internet protocol to primarily serve human readable content. >Served content is not limited to text. Transfer is encrypted for privacy.
Most content served by Gemini is written in Gemtext, a primitive markup >language that contains a limited set of line types to semantically
structure text and link to other resources. Although the protocol is
content type agnostic, Gemtext is prevalent in the known information
space. As Gemtext can be read without the need of complex clients (such
as XHTML browsers) the published information space offers good
accessibility. The Gemini protocol and Gemtext content type are not to be >extended per definition and community consent.
--
Note: Top ten content types served by known resources as per 2021-10-04:
96737 - text/gemini
30132 - text/plain
6891 - octet/stream
6586 - application/x-mscardfile
5883 - image/jpeg
3621 - image/png
1435 - application/octet-stream
944 - text/x-patch
810 - image/gif
563 - application/pdf
gemini://geminispace.info/statistics
to be accessed in a Gemini client, e.g. amfora or lagrange or via proxy >https://portal.mozz.us/gemini/geminispace.info/statistics (for example)
On Tue, 05 Oct 2021 13:48:22 +0000, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
What can be done to get the proponent to put a proper description in the
group's charter, and a brief description on the Newsgroups file line,
that gives the rest of the Usenet community not already familiar with
the protocol some idea as to what it is?
Building on noscript's post from Sunday, let me have another try. Thanks.
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
comp.infosystems.gemini Internet Hypertext System, Privacy, Accessibility.
CHARTER:
This newsgroup covers the Gemini information space served via the Gemini internet protocol, related concepts and tools created by its community.
Gemini is an internet protocol to primarily serve human readable content. Served content is not limited to text. Transfer is encrypted for privacy.
Most content served by Gemini is written in Gemtext, a primitive markup language that contains a limited set of line types to semantically
structure text and link to other resources. Although the protocol is
content type agnostic, Gemtext is prevalent in the known information
space. As Gemtext can be read without the need of complex clients (such
as XHTML browsers) the published information space offers good
accessibility. The Gemini protocol and Gemtext content type are not to be extended per definition and community consent.
I agree with this charter. I was also thinking about moving parts of the >rational to the charter like you did.
On 10/5/21 4:56 PM, Plain Text wrote:
On Tue, 05 Oct 2021 13:48:22 +0000, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
What can be done to get the proponent to put a proper description in the >>> group's charter, and a brief description on the Newsgroups file line,
that gives the rest of the Usenet community not already familiar with
the protocol some idea as to what it is?
Building on noscript's post from Sunday, let me have another try. Thanks.
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
comp.infosystems.gemini Internet Hypertext System, Privacy, Accessibility.
CHARTER:
This newsgroup covers the Gemini information space served via the Gemini
internet protocol, related concepts and tools created by its community.
Gemini is an internet protocol to primarily serve human readable content.
Served content is not limited to text. Transfer is encrypted for privacy.
Most content served by Gemini is written in Gemtext, a primitive markup
language that contains a limited set of line types to semantically
structure text and link to other resources. Although the protocol is
content type agnostic, Gemtext is prevalent in the known information
space. As Gemtext can be read without the need of complex clients (such
as XHTML browsers) the published information space offers good
accessibility. The Gemini protocol and Gemtext content type are not to be
extended per definition and community consent.
Please don't top post.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 293 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 236:04:11 |
Calls: | 6,624 |
Files: | 12,172 |
Messages: | 5,319,828 |