Nostr Web Client

I never proposed different kinds in the context of NIP-29, and I think I have retracted my proposal for different kinds in NIP-72 too, but now I don't remember what was behind that anymore.

I've been thinking about having all sorts of kinds under NIP-29 and I think it all fits. The kinds 9, 10 and 11 are described in the NIP because there was no generic chat kind message anywhere else; and kind 1 is already too loaded so it made sense to make a new one. All other kinds should be safe.

hodlbod 1y ago

Wouldn't that require current implementations to ignore events with an `h` tag? Seems like you'd want to exclude notes belonging to a group. Of course, NIP 72 has the same problem currently.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Niel Liesmons 1y ago

For public groups (communities):

Chat

👉 read + write within the community only

Everything else (including "kind 1")

👉 anyone can read anywhere + only members of the community(ies) can write

fiatjaf 1y ago

Maybe this should be made clear since I don't even know if people agree with me on it, but the difference in NIP-29 is that the relay shouldn't give all random events to anyone who walks by unless they include an "h" tag at least.