nick hmmm I wonder if that's even a valid / commonly accepted rel ... 🤔
nick hmmm I wonder if that's even a valid / commonly accepted rel ... 🤔
nick hmmm I wonder if that's even a valid / commonly accepted rel ... 🤔
nick hmmm I wonder if that's even a valid / commonly accepted rel ... 🤔
yarnd instance 🤣
yarnd instance 🤣
yarnd instance 🤣
yarnd instance 🤣
- What should the mime-type for the Twtxt feed be? Should we define one (even if its accepted by the W3C at this point)? 🤔
- What other data/properties should we return (fi any)? 🤔
- What should the mime-type for the Twtxt feed be? Should we define one (even if its accepted by the W3C at this point)? 🤔
- What other data/properties should we return (fi any)? 🤔
- What should the mime-type for the Twtxt feed be? Should we define one (even if its accepted by the W3C at this point)? 🤔
- What other data/properties should we return (fi any)? 🤔
- What should the mime-type for the Twtxt feed be? Should we define one (even if its accepted by the W3C at this point)? 🤔
- What other data/properties should we return (fi any)? 🤔
yarnc command-line client and use yarnc sync -a <feed> feed.txt edit it and re-sync it back up. -- Take a backup first in case there are bugs/dragons in the code, its kind of new, I've used it a fair bit though as has a few others 🤞
yarnc command-line client and use yarnc sync -a <feed> feed.txt edit it and re-sync it back up. -- Take a backup first in case there are bugs/dragons in the code, its kind of new, I've used it a fair bit though as has a few others 🤞
yarnc command-line client and use yarnc sync -a <feed> feed.txt edit it and re-sync it back up. -- Take a backup first in case there are bugs/dragons in the code, its kind of new, I've used it a fair bit though as has a few others 🤞
yarnc command-line client and use yarnc sync -a <feed> feed.txt edit it and re-sync it back up. -- Take a backup first in case there are bugs/dragons in the code, its kind of new, I've used it a fair bit though as has a few others 🤞
Anyway, yes essentially a Twt Subject is a formalisation of something we discovered in the Twtxt community at the time, so we formalised that into a Twt Subjec extension.
We then later realised that we could have "threading" if we build a way to address and provide clear lookups for a Twt by using content addressable hashes and so built the Twt Hash extension.
So "conversations' (what most of us are now calling yarns, plural of yarn, to basically mean to have a conversation in _some_ parts of the world) are really just chains of Twts across one or more feeds with a Twt Subject that matches a "rooted" Twt Hash.
Anyway, yes essentially a Twt Subject is a formalisation of something we discovered in the Twtxt community at the time, so we formalised that into a Twt Subjec extension.
We then later realised that we could have "threading" if we build a way to address and provide clear lookups for a Twt by using content addressable hashes and so built the Twt Hash extension.
So "conversations' (what most of us are now calling yarns, plural of yarn, to basically mean to have a conversation in _some_ parts of the world) are really just chains of Twts across one or more feeds with a Twt Subject that matches a "rooted" Twt Hash.
Anyway, yes essentially a Twt Subject is a formalisation of something we discovered in the Twtxt community at the time, so we formalised that into a Twt Subjec extension.
We then later realised that we could have "threading" if we build a way to address and provide clear lookups for a Twt by using content addressable hashes and so built the Twt Hash extension.
So "conversations' (what most of us are now calling yarns, plural of yarn, to basically mean to have a conversation in _some_ parts of the world) are really just chains of Twts across one or more feeds with a Twt Subject that matches a "rooted" Twt Hash.
Anyway, yes essentially a Twt Subject is a formalisation of something we discovered in the Twtxt community at the time, so we formalised that into a Twt Subjec extension.
We then later realised that we could have "threading" if we build a way to address and provide clear lookups for a Twt by using content addressable hashes and so built the Twt Hash extension.
So "conversations' (what most of us are now calling yarns, plural of yarn, to basically mean to have a conversation in _some_ parts of the world) are really just chains of Twts across one or more feeds with a Twt Subject that matches a "rooted" Twt Hash.
I've also implemented an experimental feature called WebFinger (
webfinger) in d940da9f05 which I'm _hoping_ will "just work"™ 🤞 (at least to provide webfinger lookups) -- client-side lookups and discover can come later.
I've also implemented an experimental feature called WebFinger (
webfinger) in d940da9f05 which I'm _hoping_ will "just work"™ 🤞 (at least to provide webfinger lookups) -- client-side lookups and discover can come later.
I've also implemented an experimental feature called WebFinger (
webfinger) in d940da9f05 which I'm _hoping_ will "just work"™ 🤞 (at least to provide webfinger lookups) -- client-side lookups and discover can come later.
I've also implemented an experimental feature called WebFinger (
webfinger) in d940da9f05 which I'm _hoping_ will "just work"™ 🤞 (at least to provide webfinger lookups) -- client-side lookups and discover can come later.
$ bat https://twtxt.net/twt/xzi7m6q | jq -r '.text'
(#kwyhrda) @<darch@neotxt https://neotxt.dk/user/darch/twtxt.txt> Looking great! :-)
I guess @lyse can't blame
yarnd1 for this one 🤣 Hehe 😅 -- But seriously, this is the problem with essentially what are free-form mentions that have no validation. If we seriously reconsidered what I _was_ trying to propose some months ago about formalizing a @user lookup spec and validation for @-mentions (_which yarnd implements, but is undocumented and I never spec'd it..._) this _might_ be solvable...
$ bat https://twtxt.net/twt/xzi7m6q | jq -r '.text'
(#kwyhrda) @<darch@neotxt https://neotxt.dk/user/darch/twtxt.txt> Looking great! :-)
I guess @lyse can't blame
yarnd1 for this one 🤣 Hehe 😅 -- But seriously, this is the problem with essentially what are free-form mentions that have no validation. If we seriously reconsidered what I _was_ trying to propose some months ago about formalizing a @user lookup spec and validation for @-mentions (_which yarnd implements, but is undocumented and I never spec'd it..._) this _might_ be solvable...
$ bat https://twtxt.net/twt/xzi7m6q | jq -r '.text'
(#kwyhrda) @<darch@neotxt https://neotxt.dk/user/darch/twtxt.txt> Looking great! :-)
I guess @lyse can't blame
yarnd1 for this one 🤣 Hehe 😅 -- But seriously, this is the problem with essentially what are free-form mentions that have no validation. If we seriously reconsidered what I _was_ trying to propose some months ago about formalizing a @user lookup spec and validation for @-mentions (_which yarnd implements, but is undocumented and I never spec'd it..._) this _might_ be solvable...
$ bat https://twtxt.net/twt/xzi7m6q | jq -r '.text'
(#kwyhrda) @<darch@neotxt https://neotxt.dk/user/darch/twtxt.txt> Looking great! :-)
I guess @lyse can't blame
yarnd1 for this one 🤣 Hehe 😅 -- But seriously, this is the problem with essentially what are free-form mentions that have no validation. If we seriously reconsidered what I _was_ trying to propose some months ago about formalizing a @user lookup spec and validation for @-mentions (_which yarnd implements, but is undocumented and I never spec'd it..._) this _might_ be solvable...
yarnc sync
yarnc sync
yarnc sync
yarnc sync