• duncesplayed@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The big difference between [the WWW] and Hyper-G is Hyper-G’s distributed link server. This server keeps track of all the relations (e.g. links) between Hyper-G objects, allowing for automatic maintenance of the information network. For example, when an object gets deleted, the link server will be able to find and delete all links pointing to the object. In contrast, in Gopher and WWW there is no easy way to find out what other documents are pointing to a given document

    Dear God that sounds horrible and amazing. I’m glad it didn’t catch on, but I really want to see it in action.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      The first sentence made me think that maybe it’s something ideologically similar to IPFS and Locutus, but yes, horrible.

      • theolodger@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        I believe it is because it can automatically (depending on the browser) start a download…

          • theolodger@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            So would I - it does not seem like it would be too much of an issue, though I have seen people complaining about such things in the past…

    • duncesplayed@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I disagree. I don’t think it’s the world’s responsibility to cater to someone’s bad browser configuration.