Nostr Web Client

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.

jimbocoin 🃏 2y ago

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 doesn’t seem to specify how to reference the image from a kind=1 note. I guess it’s expected to be the #[] content + ‘e’ tag nomenclature?

Side note: the nip doesn’t specify which tags are required/optional and whether any can be repeated. For example, could multiple ‘url’ 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:// URI’s?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Vitor Pamplona 2y ago

> The nip doesn’t 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 doesn’t 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.