I agree with this but we need to remember that standards are there for a reason. Unless we're going with the whole XKCD comic method.
Discussion
I'll reiterate, its not a core standard. Its is a descriptive spec for knowledge bases on top of nostr, who is using that right now other that our group? No one, therefore we don't need to worry about new standards.
effective navigation on a knowledge base is entirely dependent on the domain it is a part of.
A biology knowledge base is not going to have the same labels and tags as a literature, coding or writing knowledge base, and that's perfectly fine. So long as they are internally consistent with their users, they can exist as their own island. Now if your biology KB users and someone else's physics KB users want to collaborate but there are incompatabilities, the users will tell the developers to figure something out. If the developers are stubborn and don't want to change, they'll move to another client that actually works. Its not a claim for universal compatability.
Also, never made the claim that my spec is correct or cannonical. if its shit i want to know and nostr's functionality provides the fastest way to get feedback from those more experienced without permission. If a NKB really is that important, go ahead and submit it to the core nips repository, that's just not my priority. I don't really care who finds the "correct spec" i just want it to exist.
remember all that bruhaha about nip95 last year?
that is because it was objectively stupid
blossom is better but still kinda shit
Sure, and if it's shit no one will work with it aside from those that don't think its shit however retarded you think they may be. No need to be in the nips repository. Make the spec, get scrutinized and learn for yourself.
There will inevitably be multiple ways of doing the same thing and all clients will need to support all of them for compatibility
Only if shared functionality is expected between clients that share the same relays. If it is expected, go ahead and debate it and come to a shared agreement on best practices.
right know kind 30040 and 30041 exist on 2 relays for experimentation. No major client uses it. If there is incompatibility, tell me and maybe I'll change it, maybe not if I'm stuborn. In any case, I'm fine having my knowledge base client connected to my knowledge base relay where we follow all the typical NIPs with the exception of whatever specifications we use that are unique to our client.