|
|
|
|
|
by ertian
1116 days ago
|
|
I think you just misunderstand the point. A lot of criticism of Gemini seems to make the assumption that it's intended to replace HTTP and that it's badly thought through for that use. In fact, I think it basically came from a niche group of Gopher hobbyist users who wanted to fix a few longstanding annoyances with Gopher. They wanted something that anybody could write a client or server for as a fun little weekend project, not something that requires end-to-end 3rd-party-verified proxiable SSL security. |
|
If you want protocol to be light and low on bandwidth, why would you not include at least the simplest of caching semantics ?
It is just bad design decision after bad design decision