By "all" I assum you mean every possible permutation of @ and npub and nostr:. And, if #[4] is right some of those should not create #[n] and "p" tag references and should should? Ugh.
>From: vitorpamplona<-De... at 04/22/23 18:52:58 on wss://atlas.nostr.land
>---------------
>But in practice, you have to support them all if you want your users to have a good experience.
The @ thing is not spec’d and should never show up in posts. Its an artifact of people trying to use a damus feature in other clients.
more-speech translates the @ things into #[n] references, which is spec'd in Nip-08. My intent in more-speech is to ignore the :nostr stuff in the outgoing messages and to translate them into clickable references on the inbound messages.
>From: jb55 at 04/22/23 21:26:10 on wss://relay.damus.io
>---------------
>The @ thing is not spec’d and should never show up in posts. Its an artifact of people trying to use a damus feature in other clients.
Keep in mind the difference between a #[] link with a required e/p/a tag and a simple nostr: without the e/p/a tag. The nostr: doesn't necessarily add the tag, which makes it great for DMs: you can cite others without tagging them, thus avoiding a notification on something they cannot read.
It seems to me that would have been better done through a separate encrypted tags array "dm-tags" in the DM.
>From: vitorpamplona<-De... at 04/22/23 22:08:03 on wss://atlas.nostr.land
>---------------
>Keep in mind the difference between a #[] link with a required e/p/a tag and a simple nostr: without the e/p/a tag. The nostr: doesn't necessarily add the tag, which makes it great for DMs: you can cite others without tagging them, thus avoiding a notification on something they cannot read.
When #[4] talks, people listen. Plus I’ve been drinkin
