From: gopher-bounce@complete.org Date: Wed Apr 11 21:06:16 2007 Subject: [gopher] Re: Mozilla bugs about Gopher, and a dangerous one Well, yes, I see your point and perhaps I am only thinking of "me" being somewhat selfish and prefering to have external handlers, I dont like the kitchen sink approach but do understand that it's not for everyone. I am getting frustrated though, this has been like this too long with moz, first they will fix it then not on and on... I just don't use it anymore. C n Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:06:49 -0700 (PDT) Cameron Kaiser <spectre@floodgap.com> wrote: > > As for having the search engines stick to port 70. > > First I disagree, thats not a gopher problem its a moz problem . > > I agree with this also. :2347 was always the standard Veronica port. In fact, > it's non-standard of *me* to run V-2 on the regular port and I've even been > mulling over putting a mirror onto port 2347. > > > And that brings me back to... why? because Moz/Firefox is broken? > > I understand you feel most people will be using Firefox. I also feel it > > should be fixed, or drop gopher from it's core and have the option to open > > lynx when a gopher:// address is used. Such as gopher has an option for a > > web page. below is what shows up when going to an html page from gopher: > > I think this was reasonable only in that specific situation, however. The > gopher clients were never intended as multi-protocol systems, and it made > good sense to spawn external handlers. > > However, this is no longer the case as most web browsers handle the kitchen > sink (as in "everything but the"). You still have browsers minimally handling > FTP as a secondary protocol, for example, and people now expect a unified > Swiss-Army knife solution. There are also lots of Windows users who don't > have a secondary client. > > Besides, the argument that it's broken and should be fixed or removed, > frankly, applies just as well to HTML. Mozilla-core is less broken than > Internet Explorer, but it still has its deficiencies :) > > If we lose Mozilla-core support for gopher, this will be a serious blow to > the community. I certainly intend to maintain the HTTP<->Gopher proxy, which > is very popular, but it robs casual users of an easy path to browse Gopher if > support were eroded further by forcing them to do more to get it. > > -- > --------------------------------- personal: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --- > Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser@floodgap.com > -- It's tradition, that makes it okay. -- Weird Al, "Weasel Stomping Day" ----- > > > -- Join FSF as an Associate Member at: <URL:http://member.fsf.org/join?referrer=3014> Thread start (DIR) [gopher] Mozilla bugs about Gopher, and a dangerous one Thread start (DIR) [gopher] Mozilla bugs about Gopher, and a dangerous one (DIR) Followup: [gopher] Re: Mozilla bugs about Gopher, and a dangerous one (DIR) Followup: [gopher] Re: Mozilla bugs about Gopher, and a dangerous one (DIR) Followup: [gopher] Re: Mozilla bugs about Gopher, and a dangerous one (DIR) Followup: [gopher] Re: Mozilla bugs about Gopher, and a dangerous one