Replying to Avatar Stuart Bowman

nostr:npub1ltx67888tz7lqnxlrg06x234vjnq349tcfyp52r0lstclp548mcqnuz40t So I’ve been thinking about this.

To keep things simple, for Satellite, I’m going to go ahead and use kind 4549 as a direct clone of kind 1 as nostr:npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z suggested. So the content string of 4549 will be text just like kind 1.

My initial concern was that having a single kind defined as a “community post” would preclude the reuse of other event kinds, which is why I suggested “wrapping” the events.

I still intend to use kind 4549 as a wrapper to post non-kind-1 events into communities. When a non-kind-1 event is posted, the 4549 event will include a “k” tag indicating the kind of event that was wrapped.

But for 4549 events that do not have a “k” tag (or a “k” tag equal to 1), Satellite will assume that they should be treated like kind 1 and render the content directly.

I like this cause it’s just doing the simple “clone kind 1 thing” but adding the “k” tag allows me to do also do the wrapping thing so I can support other event types on Satellite. If other apps only care about kind 1 that’s fine.

I’m also implementing this weekend and writing up some documentation. Lmk if you wanna collab 🤙

Hi nostr:npub1lunaq893u4hmtpvqxpk8hfmtkqmm7ggutdtnc4hyuux2skr4ttcqr827lj is satellite still using 4549 as default kind for community messages?

I got a GitHub issue saying NIP doesn't talk about this 4549 kind.

https://github.com/vivganes/zapddit/issues/52

Not sure how to resolve this.

Cc: nostr:npub1alpha9l6f7kk08jxfdaxrpqqnd7vwcz6e6cvtattgexjhxr2vrcqk86dsn

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Actually I haven’t implemented it yet. I plan to make type 1 default, but with a checkbox on the new post editor like “hide this post from profile feed” to make 4549 optional

Thanks! I will do the same.

Also, how do we make the 4549 official? Should we write a NIP? Can I start a draft of that?

Sure, I think it would make the most sense to just make a pull request into NIP-172. If you link the pull to me I’ll review it and leave my comments

Hi nostr:npub1lunaq893u4hmtpvqxpk8hfmtkqmm7ggutdtnc4hyuux2skr4ttcqr827lj

I raised a new PR as you suggested - https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/753

I just wrote down whatever you suggested in the earlier discussion. Your inputs to this PR would be very much valuable.

CC: nostr:npub1alpha9l6f7kk08jxfdaxrpqqnd7vwcz6e6cvtattgexjhxr2vrcqk86dsn