I don't get why #[0] doesn't have a "name", just a "display_name".

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I think it was because most clients use the "name" in mentions, and you couldn't @jack if he didn't have the field set

He's a magician! 👀🪄

You have a name and not display name? Why do we need both? Which is preferable?

nostr:note1z9reyjeps45akdeqlj7ck6pfy3c3n562fnztjvhtswprxm5tgueqrcv7vn

Agreed. Having both is really confusing to new users. Especially when the “handle” allows spaces. Like, how then is it different than the display name?

The confusing part is people expect @names to be unique

yeah, the names thing is anti pattern; some apps even show it as usernames which is even more confusing for people

clients are free to map this however and they do, and have different leading suggestions in their profile editors that build different end user expectations. the meta data tags aren’t specific enough to express to a different client the intention from the user. I think if there was a third “mention_name” (not a third field for the end user) which can be mapped to the handle in damus but the display name in snort would allow interoperability of intention from the end user.

what the fuck difference does it make? personal choice and nunya.

Everybody implements "name", it's the basic thing and it's here since the beginning, "display_name" was invented as a Damus extra and never announced or specified anywhere, thus it's not implemented in many places.

I agree we don't need both.

There’s also displayName that I’ve encountered around 🤦‍♂️

Switched

Now I’m even more confused because Damus settings has “your name” and “username”

I think username is meant to be name? And “your name” is unnecessary?

And then there are pet names…

Pet names are the best… they’re from the heart ❤️

I like pseudonyms for Name display

“Given names” for account name

I do the same as Jack. Otherwise it would show up as pete@pete