Replying to Avatar Kieran

This is a little less descriptive than a nip19 link which says it has a secret, more parsing and expectation required to know that a random URL might need decryption
Avatar
jb55 2y ago

could just have a simple nip that defines a few # params and to pass Accept header for raw data. Would be nice for backwards compatibility.

If we go the nip19 + nip94 route this would be more work and encrypted images wouldn’t work in most clients, this would at least have a clickable fallback that gives clients an upgrade path. We still care about that right? Or do we want broken images in DMs too.

The amount of work just to get uploadable images working in DMs is starting to get crazy otherwise:

nip04

nip19 (required)

nip94 (required, not even planning on implementing this in damus)

vs

nip04

nip?? (optional)

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Vitor Pamplona 2y ago

We can do both. NIP-19 + URL.

To be fair, the proposed NIP-19 add-ons are not only for NIP-94 and not for just files. Other event kinds that use shareable-secret encryption can use the same technique.