Nostr Web Client

I think this is far simpler: don't support grossly broken implementations or the surface area for the protocol will be infinite.

I would much rather use a client that either ignores bad events or even better displays them with a nice warning saying "person X published a horrible event, click here to tell them to complain about their broken client" -- Ideally it would check if there's a `client` tag with a NIP-89 and p-tag the author of the client.

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 1y ago

well, assuming the client is has client tagging and the user enables it, not many of them do that yet, identifying the source of a broken event can be a bit of a sherlock holmes type of job

but making a note that alerts the user their client is buggy i think that's ok... building a client fingerprinter is kinda haha yeah nope

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Vitor Pamplona 1y ago

I just don't agree with blasting the other client. We never know the reasons why they do what they do and being nasty never got anyone anywhere.

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 1y ago

then maybe put it to a relay that keeps track of compliance fails by event id at least then we'd have a resource to identify the error and how it is malformed

would then just be a typical telemetry option you'd want to nag the user one time for "please help us make the client better" "*sends data to developer relays to improve interoperability of nostr clients"

Vitor Pamplona 1y ago

For relays, there is an easy answer: compliance testing apps. Like the check your DNS, or website for SEO applications. I think nostr:nprofile1qqswuyd9ml6qcxd92h6pleptfrcqucvvjy39vg4wx7mv9wm8kakyujgpypmhxue69uhkx6r0wf6hxtndd94k2erfd3nk2u3wvdhk6w35xs6z7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpypmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuetfde6kuer6wasku7nfvuh8xurpvdjj7a0nq40 started one.

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 1y ago

yeah, a test of client is not so easy to do... i have images of macro recorders and using key navigation and injecting it into the input stream via an extension for web clients at least