aaronpkI don't want to have to do anything special, so I made mine work that way. it does require that every nickname is unique, but it;s my own personal nickname cache so that's fine
snarfedvs eg phone contacts are local (generally ish) : you own the data you enter, eg nicknames, phone numbers, etc. they don't update when someone changes their phone #
snarfedyeah permissioning nick cache adds a huge chunk of additional complexity. we already do eg webmention without that, i'd be inclined to punt on it for nick cache
aaronpkgoogle contacts works that way actually. it's a local address book, but when you connect an entry to someone's google+ profile then it starts automatically updating things.
snarfedi don't know if [cleverdevil]'s is wholly global, but you could imagine one that is, basically just a proxy cache for fetching and parsing h-cards that insulates you from some people's sites being slow or down
snarfedalso parsing h-cards to build an address book/nick cache requires running eg representative h-card algorithm, probably others, which starts to make it reasonable to offload to a service (sometimes0 to avoid implementation complexity
[tantek]you might be building more of an address book yourself, however I specifically named "nickname cache" to indicate the very minimal implementation that is: URL for someone (and cache of their h-card from there) + an optional *local* @-name you assign (in case their h-card lacks a 'nickname' property and just their first name alone isn't enough etc.)
[tantek]snarfed, it's not an "ideal name" for what you have in mind, because you have something different in mind. I named it because it precisely indicates just what it does, no more
[tantek]"address book" is by default 100% local / static / dead info (zero updates) because that's how they all work in practice, and if you auto-update something in someone's address book, they will be surprised.
[tantek]if you're building something with any notion of updates, I'd suggest picking a different name, especially if it's going to be a user-facing feature
[tantek]I mean if you want to build something purely global you can build an h-card cache. then perhaps an h-card index. then perhaps world wide person search >:D
snarfed[tantek]: yeah that "local" baggage for address book is a good point. maybe "friend list?" to bring in the modern silo connotation where everything is auto updated?
[tantek]sad thing about Gmail is it is weirdly static too. Google Contacts is one of the biggest messes of Address Books, and feel useless to bother cleaning up
[asuh]is the term “friending” a bad connotation for a “friends list”? I get the semantic argument between friend and contact, but i personally like the term “friend” as it’s, well, friendly! family can be friends, new people i meet become friends.
[tantek]asuh, in the context of social networks/media, the term "friend" has acquired some hollowness. originally is someone your "friend" or just your "friendster", today it's your "friend" or "facebook friend"
[eddie]For example, when I was launching My Url Is, I wrote an unlisted post and mentioned both you and aaronpk. aaronpk responses, you didn’t 😆 probably clarifies this entire conversation about @-mentions and responses!
[eddie]But in all seriousness, there were times on Facebook, I would post in someone’s wall, which is essentially @-mentioning them, or tweet someone a question and I have expected a response the same as I would a text message
[eddie]Hmm interesting. That must be the essential ingredient where we differ. I think of contacting someone has being either public or private, not being required private
[eddie]That’s fair. I guess if I think about it, my post was unlisted and if we had private indieweb posts figured out at the time I probably would have made it private
[eddie]Which then leads to the discussing that wouldn’t a “nickname cache”/“contact list” also be used when sending a private mention when that is worked out?
[eddie]And it also brings up the interesting idea that should private webmentions receive more UI prominence? Since based on your analysis Private is more authentic
Zegnat!tell [cleverdevil] I was going to make a feature request for letting pseudonym.cleverdevil.io also search p-nickname (gives me Zegnat), but then realised I am not in the db anyway, haha
[jgmac1106]I still like the idea of opt-in global, I may be on ten networks but only want IndieWeb folks to mention me in four... I opt in and decide what networks to display
ZegnatThing is, you can’t stop people from mentioning you on the other six networks. If those identities of yours are public, I might chose to mention you on those as well
[jgmac1106]no but it can be a cue to the community that says hey don't mention me here....I just think folks who have faced online harrassment or other problems might have different view than "well it is online and already public so we will are maing it wasier for people to @ mention you"
[eddie]jgmac1106 as Zegnat said, people will do what they want in private nickname caches. However, a global approach like [cleverdevil]’s is literally just parsing people’s h-cards so if someone only wanted mentioned in 4 by limiting their h-card or rel=me to those 4, [cleverdevil]’s approach honors that
jgmac1106Great idea!! and I still have this vision of the opt-in IndieWeb search engine where people could decide what post types get crawled and then we could ask stuff like Hey loqi what is the most popular listen this month?
ZegnatI think current crawler opt-out technology is pretty accepted. robots.txt et al. So I wouldn’t worry too much about starting crawling for a search engine
Loqi[schmarty]: jgmac1106 left you a message 2 hours, 5 minutes ago: for some reason I can’t get my indiewebring profile recognized: https://jgregorymcverry.com/
[jgmac1106]I join a ring and I can choose which networks to share so indieweb ring that is microblog and IRC but my web literacy ring is just Twitter, so when I join my
petermolnarhttp://manu.sporny.org/2012/mythical-differences/ "Microdata 1.0 itemref: RDFa Lite 1.1 not needed - Used to copy-paste a piece of data and associate it with multiple things." - that's the complete opposite, itemref was to avoid copy-paste.
Bastinkie joined the channel; Bastinkie left the channel
[cleverdevil] The @-mention syntax with the curly brackets?
[tantek] you might be building more of an address book yourself, however I specifically named "nickname cache" to indicate the very minimal implementation that is: URL for someone (and cache of their h-card from there) + an optional *local* @-name you assign (in case their h-card lacks a 'nickname' property and just their first name alone isn't enough etc.)
snarfed but yeah https://indieweb.org/nicknames-cache as written is entirely local, not at all global
[kevinmarks] See "snitch tagging" for mentions as performance.
[jgmac1106] I still like the idea of opt-in global, I may be on ten networks but only want IndieWeb folks to mention me in four... I opt in and decide what networks to display
[eddie] jgmac1106 as Zegnat said, people will do what they want in private nickname caches. However, a global approach like [cleverdevil]’s is literally just parsing people’s h-cards so if someone only wanted mentioned in 4 by limiting their h-card or rel=me to those 4, [cleverdevil]’s approach honors that
[schmarty] [jgmac1106] looks like you're using aaronpk's webring links rather than your own!
Loqi [schmarty]: jgmac1106 left you a message 2 hours, 5 minutes ago: for some reason I can’t get my indiewebring profile recognized: https://jgregorymcverry.com/
petermolnar http://manu.sporny.org/2012/mythical-differences/ "Microdata 1.0 itemref: RDFa Lite 1.1 not needed - Used to copy-paste a piece of data and associate it with multiple things." - that's the complete opposite, itemref was to avoid copy-paste.
gRegorLove jacky, you're probably already aware, but I got a webmention from https://v2.jacky.wtf/post/456e3a31-61de-409f-9ce9-50b9db4319b8 for my XOXO article, but it doesn't link to it.