Nostr Web Client

NIP-42 is not theoretical or conceptual, it’s a merged NIP with a spec. It’s not speculation for me to say what it enables.

We’ve already built NIP-42 optionally in to one of our relays and it works on Coracle, the only client that I know of that has a working NIP-42 implementation.

Nobody is able to put any of these features in to practice unless some critical mass of clients support it. I’m not trying to get “every” client to implement it, I’m trying to get the most popular clients to implement it so that it can be used on the network.

Mazin 2y ago

If one client of the top clients implements it ahead of the others, we will absolutely provide them with extra support and try to showcase the use case on their client. I don’t understand why casting a smaller net (1) would be better than a bigger one (4) in this context?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

⚡️ᗪㄖ匚⚡️ 2y ago

Well… it seems like casting a wide net has been ineffective until this point if no one is implementing it. Im curious why if it has such a powerful use case, it’s not getting used. Just my 2sats, not trying to argue with you.

Mazin 2y ago

Elsat and I just posted these last night so the fact that one of them is already being worked on is definitely progress. Nobody has been advocating for NIP-42 from the developer side even though users ask for features that requires it everyday (without knowing what NIP is needed). I am now that advocate.

jb55 2y ago

I definitely want it to fix the dm metadata issue

Mazin 2y ago

I can absolutely lobby relay implementations to support this if Damus adds it.