On Gopher map formats redux
                  by Christopher Williams
                         2026-07-01


Yesterday I envisioned an extension to Gemtext with a few
additional features: sidebars, admonitions, and thematic
breaks. This could be called “Gemtext+”.

Today I thought of a format in the other direction, one that
could be called “Gemtext Light”. Rather than supporting
multiple block types, Gemtext Light supports none. The only
line type that it would recognize is a link, starting with
either `=>` or `=:`. All other lines are output as-is.

Word wrapping? Not handled.

Code blocks? Not needed.

Unordered lists or block quotes? Not needed (do them
yourself).

This format is more akin to classic Gopher map formats,
such as the `gophermap` format supported by Gophernicus,
Bucktooth, PyGopherd, etc., and the `gph` format supported
by geomyidae. The biggest difference between these formats
is in the way links are formatted. (Various dialects of
`gophermap` also support including other files and listing
files in a directory, but those features generally differ in
syntax between servers.)

I would argue that “Gemtext Light” has the simplest and most
consistent link syntax of them all: no tabs are needed, item
types are automatically deduced, and a link follows the
current standard syntax for a URL or reference. Also, the
display string is never intermingled between different parts
of the link so it’s easier to find (it’s always at the end,
right after the URL or reference).

Update 2026-07-02: I think the name “Gemtext-” (“Gemtext
Minus”) is better than “Gemtext Light”. What do you think?