@darch@neotxt.dk I kind of agree that we can probably omit the nick part in mentions entirely. Since they can be looked up and cached, there’s no need for this. But we’ll have to spec this all up. First let’s see what @lyse@lyse.isobeef.org and @movq@www.uninformativ.de and others like @anth@a.9srv.net thing about finally formalising a standard way to lookup feed URI(s) and define a slightly more saner? @-mention syntax/usage pattern. I for one hate manually typing out (for example) @<darch https://neotxt.dk/user/darch/twtxt.txt> like this @darch@neotxt.dk 😅

@prologic@twtxt.net I’m not really sure what you mean. Don’t we already have nick = and url = in the metadata section? Which problem are we trying to solve? 🤔

@prologic@twtxt.net Hmmm.

So you’re suggesting to make prologic@twtxt.net the “primary identifier” of a user, right? That’s the string that I would configure in my twtxt client when I want to follow someone. Then when my client fetches the feed, it first does a webfinger lookup to find the feed URL and the nickname. (Or maybe this only immediately after adding the user to my client and then maybe update it every now and then.)

Did I understand correctly so far? 😅

@prologic@twtxt.net Alright, buuuut … what do we gain from that?

You could do almost the same thing currently with just the feed URL. nick = can be read from metadata. The canonical feed URL used for twt hashing is well-defined, too (first url = in metadata).

Sorry if I’m being too dumb. 😅

@darch@neotxt.dk Hmmm … if the argument is “not all twtxt files have all required fields”, then wouldn’t this also apply to webfinger? Not all servers that host a twtxt file will also serve webfinger info. 🤔 You’d probably always have to implement some fallback mechanism.

I don’t really know anything about “indieweb”, though. I’ll have to read up on that first. 😅