Christian Moe <[email protected]> writes:
> A small paradox is that it would not make the alternative
> (proprietary-JS-free) links available precisely to those who won't
> enable JS in the browser at all and would stand to benefit from them.
Yes, this is true. I'm not sure a JS program would be the best way to solve
this. An alternative could also be a standalone service which acts like the
LibRedirect browser extension, for example.
> A rewrite could go at least two ways:
>
> 1. Single links with an option where to go when you click them
> - annoying if asked every time, would need a cookie
>
> 2. Additional links side by side
> - more clutter, less clicks/cookies
The option I had in mind was 1). 2) is also fine, and can be done entirely
without JS as well (though perhaps JS is useful to query actively working
instances, especially if many are transient).
The FSF approach recommends this:
"A GNU program should not recommend, promote, or grant legitimacy to the use
of any nonfree program. [...] we can and should refuse to advertise them to
new potential customers, or to give the public the impression that their
existence is legitimate."
-- https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#References
If this is also the goal of Org mode, then Worg should link to alternative
frontends by default. If the goal is to be more user-friendly to people who
don't know about / stand by this philosophy, that's probably not ideal. I guess
it's a tradeoff between these ideals, which also depends on the effectiveness
(Gothub is missing some features, for example) and reliability of the
alternative frontends.
Anyway, I'll work out an MVP. Or a few, to investigate some possilibities. But
I'm not sure what direction I want to go in the end, since that also depends on
the philosophy and goals of Org mode in general.
