Sorry to drop in. Can someone explain whatās happening? Iām working on an image-based feature and Iād like to understand what changes (if any) I should be anticipating. š
Discussion
Take a look in NIP-94. It adds a hash to verify ifnthe picture has be doctored by the server, a blurhash to show when loading and a description for accessibility. It's a great spec.
Thanks! Just read it.
It seems like the argument against is that it creates an extra step (client has to query the 1063 event then fetch the image).
The nip doesnāt seem to specify how to reference the image from a kind=1 note. I guess itās expected to be the #[] content + āeā tag nomenclature?
Side note: the nip doesnāt specify which tags are required/optional and whether any can be repeated. For example, could multiple āurlā tags be provided for failover?
Are 1063 events replaceable? For example, if the canonical url of an image were to change for some reason.
Is there a list of allowed protocols for the url? One might assume http:// and https://. What about data:// URIās?
> The nip doesnāt seem to specify how to reference the image from a kind=1 note.
Yep, we just do what we usually do for every other referenced post, either the old #[] or the new nostr:nevent.
> Side note: the nip doesnāt specify which tags are required/optional and whether any can be repeated.
Yep. We should probably refine the text as we figure out the details.
> Are 1063 events replaceable?
They are not replaceable.
> Is there a list of allowed protocols for the URL?
Amethyst assumes any URI. As a viewer, we must support whatever comes in.
#[4]ā is replacing urls with notes that you have to fetch to get the url which adds extra latency to image loading. I would rather just have this info in the kind1 tags so I donāt have to n+x notes for every note in the timeline.
The extra metadata is great and I will likely do something similar, but I probably wonāt have it in a separate note.
Makes sense, thanks for explaining! š
Guys, I was watching the entire conversation with šæ
was here by accident , do not regret it
š coding reality show
Absolutely. I find it funny that the thread starts we me posting Ā«Ā Iām tiredā¦Ā Ā» then they barged in.
Ā«JbĀ comes from the right to aggressively tackle the issueĀ Ā»
Ā«Ā Vitor Pamplonaā attempts to deflect the attack. It looks as if maybeā¦Ā Ā»
Ā«Ā But Jb doesnāt give up and tries again from the leftĀ Ā»
Ā«Ā Vitor Pamplonaā seems to have found a way to maybe divert the flow of the action in the other directionĀ Ā»
Ā«Ā no, What a shocker pablof7zā enters the ring unexpectedly tapped in by jb55 
šššš
LOL
That sums it up! š
Oh and by the way, I had to go back to an older version of Amethyst because I want to be able to upload images that everyone can see directly in my client.
So tell me if you can see the image that started it all! š
how to add two image with NIP-94?
Iām not entirely sure. My guess would be that in the kind=1 note content, youād have # [0] and # [1]. Then in the tags, youād have two āeā tags pointing to two different kind=1063 (NIP-94) events.
I still support kind 1 event with urls in content.
and NIP-94 event will also showed but don't be send from my client.
this situation is exactly what major clients need to take into account, each breaking change imposes a tax on everyone else that is running a small client
nostr: metions are superior to #[], but now I am forced to go back and update a bunch of clients I wrote just to regain what was previously working
it's ok for new features, but breaking functionality must be embraced very slowly