Conversation #zafd26q

Recent tws in this reply to #zafd26q

@prologic (#zafd26q) Huh. computed the hash zafd26q for melyanna’s original twt. I get kjsxeka. The difference appears to be that my client used the URL, while used just http://. That’s a) a bit of a problem if people provide their feed over multiple protocols (half-baked thought, maybe we should omit the scheme? 🤔), b) might be a bug because’s web interface shows https://. 😯

 (6 days ago)

(#zafd26q) Can we come up with something that is easier to implement in other clients or can be done by hand than hash? As I read the docs about the original subject is was like email (re: original post) right?! So if instead of the hash we do (re: 2021-02-21T08:42:00Z <@nick URL>) where the datetime is just copied from the .txt with the original post. Then it is also human readable and can be parsed by other clients.

 (6 days ago)

(#zafd26q) … Since this is gonna be a lot longer than the hash, it could added to the end of the line of each reply post instead of in the beginning for human readbility of the raw txt


(#zafd26q) @prologic Can I ask what these “interesting useful properties” are?

Also the rebranding to could be a good time to break compatibility.
Or have the options both for (hash) and (re: 2021-02-21T10:44:10Z )

You must be Logged in to join the conversation.