# I am the Watcher. I am your guide through this vast new twtiverse.
#
# Usage:
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/users View list of users and latest twt date.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/twt View all twts.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/mentions?uri=:uri View all mentions for uri.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/conv/:hash View all twts for a conversation subject.
#
# Options:
# uri Filter to show a specific users twts.
# offset Start index for quey.
# limit Count of items to return (going back in time).
#
# twt range = 1 13
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/3rvya6q
If we must stick to hashes for threading, can we maybe make it mandatory to always include a reference to the original twt URL when writing replies?
Instead of
(#123467) hello foo bar
you would have
(#123467 http://foo.com/tw.txt) hello foo bar
or maybe even:
(#123467 2025-04-30T12:30:31Z http://foo.com/tw.txt) hello foo bar
This would greatly help in reconstructing broken threads, since hashes are obviously unfortunately one-way tickets. The URL/timestamp would *not* be used for threading, just for discovery of feeds that you don’t already follow.
I don’t insist on including the timestamp, but having *some idea* which feed we’re talking about would help a lot.
If we must stick to hashes for threading, can we maybe make it mandatory to always include a reference to the original twt URL when writing replies?
Instead of
(#123467) hello foo bar
you would have
(#123467 http://foo.com/tw.txt) hello foo bar
or maybe even:
(#123467 2025-04-30T12:30:31Z http://foo.com/tw.txt) hello foo bar
This would greatly help in reconstructing broken threads, since hashes are obviously unfortunately one-way tickets. The URL/timestamp would *not* be used for threading, just for discovery of feeds that you don’t already follow.
I don’t insist on including the timestamp, but having *some idea* which feed we’re talking about would help a lot.
@movq oh this would be handy! i think my feed's busted after the migration lol
@movq oh this would be handy! i think my feed's busted after the migration lol
@movq Lwt me think on this.
@movq If we're focusing on solving the "missing roots" problems. I would start to think about "client recommendations". The first recommendation would be:
1. Replying to a Twt that has no initial Subject must itself have a Subject of the form (hash; url).
This way it’s a hint to fetching clients that follow B, but not A (in the case of no mentions) that the Subject/Root might (very likely) is in the feed url.
Otherwise assume normal behavior. Pretty easy to implement I think.
@prologic Not sure I’d attach any if clauses to this. My point is: Every time I see a hash, I’d like to have a hint as to where to find the corresponding twt.
@prologic Not sure I’d attach any if clauses to this. My point is: Every time I see a hash, I’d like to have a hint as to where to find the corresponding twt.
@movq Shall I add this to the spec I'm writing? ✍️
@movq When I reply to a message, I typically already mention the feed. Just like in this very message. I believe this mechanism should work for most replies. But there are of course the odd responses where I do not mention the original feed, but rather some other feed(s) instead to which I actually want to reply. Maybe "forking", as prologic calls it, would be the better option there.
@lyse Kind of, but on the other hand: This twt right here refers to 3rvya6q and *your* feed, but your feed certainly does not include that particular twt (it comes from *my* feed).
But my proposal probably isn’t very helpful, either. We have this flat conversation model, so … this twt right here, what should it refer to? Your twt? My root twt? I don’t know.
@prologic Don’t include this just yet. I need to think about this some more (or drop the idea).
@lyse Kind of, but on the other hand: This twt right here refers to 3rvya6q and *your* feed, but your feed certainly does not include that particular twt (it comes from *my* feed).
But my proposal probably isn’t very helpful, either. We have this flat conversation model, so … this twt right here, what should it refer to? Your twt? My root twt? I don’t know.
@prologic Don’t include this just yet. I need to think about this some more (or drop the idea).