Some other nitpicks about this example I just noticed, kind 40's should just use a `g` tag since it's applying the geotag to itself. If that's the convention, then following NIP 32 `["L", "#g"], ["l", "9qqj3", "#g"]` is probably better when tagging other events.
Building off daniele's example:
```
{
"kind": 40,
"tags": [
["L", "geohash"],
["l", "9qqj3", "geohash"],
["e", "10fbc672..."]
],
"content": "I'm tagging the location for this event",
...
}
```
This could work? But geo clients need to implement it/expect it.
nostr:npub1jlrs53pkdfjnts29kveljul2sm0actt6n8dxrrzqcersttvcuv3qdjynqn what do you think? Is this misuse of labels? 🤔 feels like a hack kinda but maybe not
Discussion
No replies yet.