Searching We.Love.Privacy.Club

Twts matching #Twt
Sort by: Newest, Oldest, Most Relevant
lyse
lyse.isobeef.org
 (3y ago)

@movq@www.uninformativ.de @prologic@twtxt.net I just reread the spec and it seems to be even a bit outdated regarding machine-parsable conversation grouping. We long dropped the need to specify a whole hash tag with URL (#<hash url>), the simplified version without the URL (#hash) is enough.

The hash tag extension specification is kind of missing the same. However, I’m not sure if that short form is considered supported in general (as opposed to be a special case for subjects only) by the majority of the twtxt/yarn community.

Now the question arises, in order to keep things simple, should we even only allow the simplified twt hash tag for subjects and forbid the long version? This would also save quite a bit of space. The URL is probably not shown anyways in most clients. And if so, clients might rewrite URLs to their own instances. On the other hand, there’s technically nothing wrong with the long version in current parser implementations. And deprecating stuff without very good reason isn’t cool.

⤋ Read More