# 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 2
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/swcs52a
Summary of Discussions (_as best I can_):
- @lyse and @sorenpeter express simplicity. Both Lyse and Sorenpeter support location-based addressing.
- @falsifian believes we should continue to develop ideas and extensions progressively over time like we've always done.
- @david @quark and @bender would like a better user experience, especially when threads break due to edits, deletions or feed location changes.
- @anth would like to see utf-8 mandated, and the threading model remain largely the same as it is today, which is primarily based on the convention of a Twt Subject anyway, Twt Hash(es) just make the threading "more precise". Anth also states that format, client and server specification/recommendations should be kept separate.
- @movq @xuu sorry you two haven't said too much really, so I'm not too sure?
Overall, the 22 votes we've had on the poll from the community (_if you can call it a community?_) have clearly shown that:
- We continue to support content-based addressing. (65/35)
- We think about formally supporting edits/deletes (60/40)
- We do not increase the use of cryptography (_thworing things like authenticity and identity out the window_) (70/30)
And overall the NPS (_net promoter score_) of "Would I recommend Twtxt to a friend" is a whopping 7/10 (_which is crazy! 🤯_)
Let's have our monthly catch up soonâ„¢ (1hr) and discuss together. My own take on the direction we should take at this point is as follows:
- We continue to use hashing for the threading model.
- We think about changing this to SHA-256 for simplicity.
- We either adopt @anth's UUID approach or @lyse Dynamic URL approach.
- We continue to incrementally/progressively improve things over time as @falsifian suggested.
- We think about mandating utf-8 as @anth suggests which makes things so much easier for everyone.
- We further discuss the merits/ideas of supporting formal Edit/Delete requests or other ways to better support this in some way.
Summary of Discussions (_as best I can_):
- @lyse and @sorenpeter express simplicity. Both Lyse and Sorenpeter support location-based addressing.
- @falsifian believes we should continue to develop ideas and extensions progressively over time like we've always done.
- @david @quark and @bender would like a better user experience, especially when threads break due to edits, deletions or feed location changes.
- @anth would like to see utf-8 mandated, and the threading model remain largely the same as it is today, which is primarily based on the convention of a Twt Subject anyway, Twt Hash(es) just make the threading "more precise". Anth also states that format, client and server specification/recommendations should be kept separate.
- @movq @xuu sorry you two haven't said too much really, so I'm not too sure?
Overall, the 22 votes we've had on the poll from the community (_if you can call it a community?_) have clearly shown that:
- We continue to support content-based addressing. (65/35)
- We think about formally supporting edits/deletes (60/40)
- We do not increase the use of cryptography (_thworing things like authenticity and identity out the window_) (70/30)
And overall the NPS (_net promoter score_) of "Would I recommend Twtxt to a friend" is a whopping 7/10 (_which is crazy! 🤯_)
Let's have our monthly catch up soonâ„¢ (1hr) and discuss together. My own take on the direction we should take at this point is as follows:
- We continue to use hashing for the threading model.
- We think about changing this to SHA-256 for simplicity.
- We either adopt @anth's UUID approach or @lyse Dynamic URL approach.
- We continue to incrementally/progressively improve things over time as @falsifian suggested.
- We think about mandating utf-8 as @anth suggests which makes things so much easier for everyone.
- We further discuss the merits/ideas of supporting formal Edit/Delete requests or other ways to better support this in some way.