> Your propose scheme while simple doesn't do this.
It doesn’t do that because it’s not taking the content of a twt into account (only its timestamp). Okay. But the mere fact that we’re talking about “how to solve the edit problem” stems from using content addressing – so maybe content addressing isn’t the best thing to use here? 🤔
> Your propose scheme while simple doesn't do this.
It doesn’t do that because it’s not taking the content of a twt into account (only its timestamp). Okay. But the mere fact that we’re talking about “how to solve the edit problem” stems from using content addressing – so maybe content addressing isn’t the best thing to use here? 🤔
> Your propose scheme while simple doesn't do this.
It doesn’t do that because it’s not taking the content of a twt into account (only its timestamp). Okay. But the mere fact that we’re talking about “how to solve the edit problem” stems from using content addressing – so maybe content addressing isn’t the best thing to use here? 🤔
> Your propose scheme while simple doesn't do this.
It doesn’t do that because it’s not taking the content of a twt into account (only its timestamp). Okay. But the mere fact that we’re talking about “how to solve the edit problem” stems from using content addressing – so maybe content addressing isn’t the best thing to use here? 🤔
<timestamp> (#hash;#originalHash) <content> For example.
<timestamp> (#hash;#originalHash) <content> For example.
(#hash;#originalHash) would also work.Maybe I’m being a bit too purist/minimalistic here. As I said before (in one of the 1372739 posts on this topic – or maybe I didn’t even send that twt, I don’t remember 😅), I never really liked hashes to begin with. They aren’t super hard to implement but they are kind of against the beauty of the original twtxt – because you *need* special client support for them. It’s not something that you could write manually in your
twtxt.txt file. With @sorenpeter’s proposal, though, that would be possible.I don’t know … maybe it’s just me. 🥴
I’m also being a bit selfish, to be honest: Implementing
(#hash;#originalHash) in jenny *for editing your own feed* would not be a no-brainer. (Editing is already kind of unsupported, actually.) It wouldn’t be a problem to implement it for fetching other people’s feeds, though.
(#hash;#originalHash) would also work.Maybe I’m being a bit too purist/minimalistic here. As I said before (in one of the 1372739 posts on this topic – or maybe I didn’t even send that twt, I don’t remember 😅), I never really liked hashes to begin with. They aren’t super hard to implement but they are kind of against the beauty of the original twtxt – because you *need* special client support for them. It’s not something that you could write manually in your
twtxt.txt file. With @sorenpeter’s proposal, though, that would be possible.I don’t know … maybe it’s just me. 🥴
I’m also being a bit selfish, to be honest: Implementing
(#hash;#originalHash) in jenny *for editing your own feed* would not be a no-brainer. (Editing is already kind of unsupported, actually.) It wouldn’t be a problem to implement it for fetching other people’s feeds, though.
(#hash;#originalHash) would also work.Maybe I’m being a bit too purist/minimalistic here. As I said before (in one of the 1372739 posts on this topic – or maybe I didn’t even send that twt, I don’t remember 😅), I never really liked hashes to begin with. They aren’t super hard to implement but they are kind of against the beauty of the original twtxt – because you *need* special client support for them. It’s not something that you could write manually in your
twtxt.txt file. With @sorenpeter’s proposal, though, that would be possible.I don’t know … maybe it’s just me. 🥴
I’m also being a bit selfish, to be honest: Implementing
(#hash;#originalHash) in jenny *for editing your own feed* would not be a no-brainer. (Editing is already kind of unsupported, actually.) It wouldn’t be a problem to implement it for fetching other people’s feeds, though.
(#hash;#originalHash) would also work.Maybe I’m being a bit too purist/minimalistic here. As I said before (in one of the 1372739 posts on this topic – or maybe I didn’t even send that twt, I don’t remember 😅), I never really liked hashes to begin with. They aren’t super hard to implement but they are kind of against the beauty of the original twtxt – because you *need* special client support for them. It’s not something that you could write manually in your
twtxt.txt file. With @sorenpeter’s proposal, though, that would be possible.I don’t know … maybe it’s just me. 🥴
I’m also being a bit selfish, to be honest: Implementing
(#hash;#originalHash) in jenny *for editing your own feed* would not be a no-brainer. (Editing is already kind of unsupported, actually.) It wouldn’t be a problem to implement it for fetching other people’s feeds, though.