Closed autonome closed 5 years ago
@autonome I vote for "upgrade" or "go beyond", but defer to decision of @momack2.
while I like how "upgrade" sounds better, the connotations don't make sense (sounds like we're just iterating within the spec of HTTP, not building a new envisioning of how a hypertext transport protocol should work).
Would "surpass" work here? Same meaning as "go beyond"/"leapfrog", but slightly pithier IMHO. =]
"Surpass" works in the sense that it sounds like a successor. cc @autonome @momack2
To "surpass HTTP in order to build a better web" strikes me as redundant.
Although kind of clinical, would a simple line such as this suffice (especially given that this is a supporting caption, as opposed to a header)? … "IPFS aims to replace HTTP and build a better web for all of us."
@ericronne I can see both ways. Again -- deferring to @momack2.
I prefer the former. I don’t think the latter suggestion mitigates the point Deitrich made and seems fuzzier to me.
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:01 PM Jessica Schilling notifications@github.com wrote:
@ericronne https://github.com/ericronne I can see both ways. Again -- deferring to @momack2 https://github.com/momack2.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ipfs/website/pull/337?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAEXAFZVMH4GVZFA7TWTNN3QJ7XZLA5CNFSM4IXF32Q2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD62QGFQ#issuecomment-531956502, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEXAF2NO5QHEBVKNTYRTH3QJ7XZLANCNFSM4IXF32QQ .
re "replace" - The criticism I received was explained as "replacing http" is arrogant - not only does it not acknowledge how amazing the http web actually is, it far oversells IPFS in a way that gives people a negative feeling.
@autonome Thank you for chipping away at these!
This whole sentence needs a rework, but here are a couple of suggestions for replacing "replace" for now.