Some clients have a setting to inline images, or/and a shortcut to do so on the current page. Most clients can display images when the user follows a link to one. So images are quite useless as decorations (as most will probably not see them) but if an article contains useful images most users will be able to see those.
When I was younger, I thought Gemini was very cool mostly because it was an alternative protocol to the mainstream. It made me feel very inner-circle in the development world, for some reason.
As I've grown, I've come to learn I'm a very visual learner. I've learned that "clear is kind", and for many, image and text are both important, but many images have a way of conveying what is difficult to express in words without being overly verbose.
I agree, illustrations are an essential part, especially when teaching something.
It is rather easy to have one running alongside the other and the gemtext syntax is such it is quite easy to make automatic converters. Did you encounter issues maintaining both?
I mean I truly believe anyone can do small websites using HTML standards so for the actual content producer Gemini doesn't have much appeal. On the other hand using Gemini provide the users/visitors a guarantee they will not end up following a link and ending up in a bloated, privacy and ad nightmare. So I think it is sane to offer that even if you believe in small regular web.
The difference is you can actually access it today without fear of being thrown back in 2025 by doing such a simple thing as following a link on the same protocol.
Plus glad to see it call "Gemini" instead of "Gemini Protocol", too bad google stole the name after Gemini was a thing. And unlike gopher, Gemini renders fine on Cell Phones.
As I mentioned before in these threads, I find Gemini far easier to maintain then anything associated with html. It is very simple. I had moved my WEB space to Gemini on sdf* a while ago and my old WEB space points to my Gemini Site.
FWIW, google forced Gemini to change its URLs, it is now:
Similar to the indie web/slow web movements, it's genuinely a shame that these qualities are essentially anathema to the business model of so much of modern social media.
The lack of images made Gemini unworkable for me. I know it's by design, but illustrations are an important part of my writing.
It's more sensible to build the sort of websites I want to see, and to use Reader Mode for other people's websites.
Some clients have a setting to inline images, or/and a shortcut to do so on the current page. Most clients can display images when the user follows a link to one. So images are quite useless as decorations (as most will probably not see them) but if an article contains useful images most users will be able to see those.
When I was younger, I thought Gemini was very cool mostly because it was an alternative protocol to the mainstream. It made me feel very inner-circle in the development world, for some reason.
As I've grown, I've come to learn I'm a very visual learner. I've learned that "clear is kind", and for many, image and text are both important, but many images have a way of conveying what is difficult to express in words without being overly verbose.
I agree, illustrations are an essential part, especially when teaching something.
A month or so ago, I migrated all of my Gemini posts to my blog and shut down my Gemini server.
For me there wasn't really a point to the effort. I'm glad the protocol exists and that people are enjoying it, but I'll stick to HTML.
It is rather easy to have one running alongside the other and the gemtext syntax is such it is quite easy to make automatic converters. Did you encounter issues maintaining both?
I mean I truly believe anyone can do small websites using HTML standards so for the actual content producer Gemini doesn't have much appeal. On the other hand using Gemini provide the users/visitors a guarantee they will not end up following a link and ending up in a bloated, privacy and ad nightmare. So I think it is sane to offer that even if you believe in small regular web.
Never heard of it, but what's the difference with the web in 1994?
The difference is you can actually access it today without fear of being thrown back in 2025 by doing such a simple thing as following a link on the same protocol.
I believe that's the entire point.
TLS. Beyond that, as little as possible is basically the goal.
So glad to see the actual Gemini here instead of the modern AI horror most of the people think about when hearing Gemini.
You’re so glad that, rather than discuss it, you redirect the conversation back to Google’s Gemini?
Plus glad to see it call "Gemini" instead of "Gemini Protocol", too bad google stole the name after Gemini was a thing. And unlike gopher, Gemini renders fine on Cell Phones.
As I mentioned before in these threads, I find Gemini far easier to maintain then anything associated with html. It is very simple. I had moved my WEB space to Gemini on sdf* a while ago and my old WEB space points to my Gemini Site.
FWIW, google forced Gemini to change its URLs, it is now:
https://geminiprotocol.net/docs/gemtext-specification.gmi
and the FAQ, the article has the old URL
https://geminiprotocol.net/docs/faq.gmi
* sdf:
https://wiki.sdf.org/doku.php?id=gemini_site_setup_and_hosti...
List of clients are here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol)
> too bad google stole the name after Gemini was a thing
Gemini was one of the 48 constellations described by the 2nd century AD astronomer Ptolemy
From the Wiki page the formatting capabilities to me look too limiting. How about tables? Are nested (numbered/bulleted) lists a thing?
Gemini is a part of the “small internet” movement: https://www.linuxpromagazine.com/index.php/Issues/2021/245/T...
But but but... how would this would allow me to run arbitrary client-side code in order to snoop on users, mine shitcoins or enforce DRM?!
> Simpler
> Human Scale
> Distraction Free
> Privacy Protecting
Similar to the indie web/slow web movements, it's genuinely a shame that these qualities are essentially anathema to the business model of so much of modern social media.