2023-09-26 UTC
RasAlGhoul, [schmarty], [jeremycherfas], SigmundurM and gRegor joined the channel
# 19:55 Loqi [preview] [snarfed] #419 v5 no longer links to original source page (or `u-url`) # 20:36 GWG [snarfed]: We wrote the code from 2020-2023... I can't remember what I did yesterday.... but I know there were some things people had issues with that might have been intentional and others that weren't # 20:37 GWG I want to look at a different way of doing the overflow for the piles as well # 20:38 [snarfed] hmm ok. linking to the source page is definitely what all webmention receivers should do, including you all 😁 # 20:38 [snarfed] if it helps, the link is far higher priority for me personally than truncating facepiles # 20:39 GWG [snarfed]: We were linking to the author url before, not the source url # 20:40 [snarfed] I'm talking about replies, not facepiles. replies linked to the actual reply # 20:40 [snarfed] (facepiles in v5 are still correctly linking to the author, yes) # 20:41 GWG Once again, need to get caught up # 20:41 GWG But specifically with this...what design would you think would look good on overflow? # 20:42 GWG Numeric with expansion is what I'm thinking. # 20:42 [snarfed] the design it already used in v4 was great, doesn't need a new design # 20:43 [snarfed] (only showed the first n; if there were more, it showed an ellipsis at the end that could be clicked to show the rest) # 20:44 GWG That's why I was thinking a details tag...you don't need any JS # 20:45 GWG Also, was looking at other designs # 20:49 GWG [snarfed]: Yes, but I'm sitting in a waiting room... contemplations is all I can do here. # 20:49 GWG [snarfed]: I remember a discussion between you and aaronpk on clustering years ago that might help # 20:50 GWG And I can dump into an issue as I think # 20:53 GWG Well, there was something I'm thinking of, maybe it was a [tantek] braindump # 20:54 GWG The question is..if you have 20 faces, who do you want to show? # 20:54 GWG Do you want to exclude people with invalid images? # 20:56 [snarfed] ooh fun! let's start with just bringing back the lost truncating functionality, then after that we can think about how to prioritize # 20:56 [snarfed] (eg on a popular post, I don't want my WP server trying to fetch hundreds of images across the internet before it can serve the post HTML) # 20:57 GWG [snarfed]: I still want to cache them locally # 20:57 GWG [pfefferle] and I differed on that, so I may make my code an optional separate piece # 21:17 [snarfed] GWG yes! that kind of image cache would be a great opt in feature of the plugin, or add-on plugin # 21:17 [snarfed] I'm never a fan of plugin proliferation, I'd vote for opt in feature, but 🤷 # 21:17 GWG [snarfed]: Code is written, may publish it as a GitHub plugin for now until we settle # 21:18 GWG I know [pfefferle] preferred to suggest Avatar Privacy but it didn't work well for me.
[snarfed] noticed another regression in v5 webmention plugin: comments used to link to the original source, either its u-url or just the source URL itself, but now they link to the fragment on the WordPress post page. I assume that wasn't an intentional change? https://github.com/pfefferle/wordpress-webmention/issues/419