Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length.

From	Stone Fox <stone@unix.dog>
Newsgroups	comp.infosystems.gopher
Subject	Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length.
Date	2025-02-28 22:21 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<slrnvs4dki.2s8.stone@io.local> (permalink)
References	<vpl3rj$24spt$1@dont-email.me> <vpru4s$3iqou$1@dont-email.me> <vps00l$3jnu6$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2025-02-28, Lawrence Woodman <lorrywoodman@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:03:25 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence Woodman wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 18:57:55 -0000 (UTC), IanJ wrote:
>> 
>>> Fellow gophers,
>>> 
>>> I recently discovered that UMN Gopher client has some rather odd
>>> behaviour when deciding if it should truncate menu titles.
>>> 
>>> The RFC suggests they should be kept below 70 characters. I have always
>>> addhered to this and used 69 but I received a report, after adding the
>>> date to the end of some lines, that my titles were now being truncated
>>> when viewed on an 80 character display.
>>> 
>>> This didn't add up, quite literally, so I did a little investigation of
>>> the source code. It seems 13 characters are reserved for the left info
>>> margin. The margin can be less depending on the index number of the
>>> menu item, this is a problem in itself. But following its calculation
>>> logic, you have COLS - 13 resulting in the maxwidth. 80 - 13 = 67, so
>>> even though my lines are addhering to the RFC, the client thinks they
>>> are too long.
>>> 
>>> The irony is that truncated lines have the last two characters replaced
>>> with '..'. Which actually overwrites the last two digits of the date.
>>> If the accounting was correct, then it would remain untouched...
>>> 
>>> I wrote a phlog post about it here with more detail:
>>> gopher://gopher.icu/0/phlog/Computing/Display-lines-and-UMN-gopher.md
>>> 
>>> In the meantime I shortened my menu titles to 67 characters to stop the
>>> phantom truncation. But as per the phlog post, I'm wondering what to do
>>> about it...
>>> 
>>> Any helpful suggestions or guidance greatfully received.
>> 
>> 
>> It would be worth submitting a patch to alter the client's display so
>> that it only takes 11 characters on the left hand side and makes the
>> correct calculation.
>
>> [SNIP]
>
> I've been thinking about this a little more and rereading the RFC and it
> does say 'Clients may truncate to a length convenient to them'.  Although
> this client's calculation as to when to truncate and show '..' is a little
> off, the decision to truncate at less than 69 characters makes some sense
> given how it displays menus, especially when you consider that types such
> as <HTML> are indicated after the title.  It might be that we have to
> accept that titles can be truncated and plan our sites accordingly.
>
> Lorry
>  
> ---
> XCCP: A Shell Extension for CP/M
> https://techtinkering.com/articles/xccp-a-shell-extension-for-cpm/

Good point. In that case, you can choose any length you like under 70
characters knowing that any client that truncates below 70 characters
is just exercising its freedom to truncate to a length thats
convenient to them.

And if your lines are truncated by a client, despite being under 70
characters, don't submit a patch; just send the link to your
gopherhole and let the developer see how it looks in their client.
The odds are good that they'll wonder why its truncated, and learn
that it doesn't need to be truncated.

Back to comp.infosystems.gopher | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

UMN Gopher - menu title length. IanJ <SPAMian_jones_01@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> - 2025-02-25 18:57 +0000
  Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. Stone Fox <stone@unix.dog> - 2025-02-26 21:29 +0000
  Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. Lawrence Woodman <lorrywoodman@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 09:03 +0000
    Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. Lawrence Woodman <lorrywoodman@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 09:35 +0000
      Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. Stone Fox <stone@unix.dog> - 2025-02-28 22:21 +0000
    Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. IanJ <SPAMian_jones_01@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> - 2025-03-01 20:30 +0000
      Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. "Arti F. Idiot" <addr@is.invalid> - 2025-03-01 20:42 -0700
        Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> - 2025-03-02 15:59 +1000
        Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. IanJ <SPAMian_jones_01@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> - 2025-03-02 10:58 +0000
          Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. jeojet@not.valid - 2025-03-02 16:13 +0000
            Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. IanJ <SPAMian_jones_01@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> - 2025-03-02 18:36 +0000
          Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. morena <morena@morena.rip> - 2025-03-03 20:39 +0100
            Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. IanJ <SPAMian_jones_01@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> - 2025-03-03 21:00 +0000
              Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. morena <morena@morena.rip> - 2025-03-03 23:42 +0100
                Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. IanJ <SPAMian_jones_01@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> - 2025-03-03 23:04 +0000
      Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. Stone Fox <stone@unix.dog> - 2025-03-02 21:34 +0000
        Re: UMN Gopher - menu title length. IanJ <SPAMian_jones_01@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> - 2025-03-03 23:23 +0000

csiph-web