#social 2018-09-27
2018-09-27 UTC
# 
nightpool[m] puckipedia: is there a problem with conversation not explicitly having the @id type?
# nightpool[m] "slow to search" isn't the types of indexes on any given record a implementation issue?
# nightpool[m] I guess I'm just having trouble understanding what the benefits of marking it as an @id is, if we're not expecting to do compaction or whatever on it
# nightpool[m] context documents are not schemata
# nightpool[m] puckipedia: we should use a property other then ostatus: conversation for that then
# nightpool[m] because ostatus: conversation was only ever designed for migration
# nightpool[m] so that if someone replied over AP to a thread you had silenced in ostatus world, it would stay silenced
# nightpool[m] because we forgot and because there was some disagreement around whether context was the correct property
# nightpool[m] yeah the schema.org thing seems straightforwardly correct
# nightpool[m] the reason I'm pushing back on the conversation thing is 1) I don't want non ostatus systems using an ostatus property and 2) I'm worried about bloating the context with more random type information
