Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
Vitor Pamplona | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Acho que o highlighter gera 2 eventos quando vc escreve um comentario. 

nostr:nprofile1qqs04xzt6ldm9qhs0ctw0t58kf4z57umjzmjg6jywu0seadwtqqc75sprfmhxue69uhhq7tjv9kkjepwve5kzar2v9nzucm0d5hsz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjme0qythwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnswf5k6ctv9ehx2ap0y8qdrm is highlighter going with the `comment` idea from nostr:nprofile1qqsr9cvzwc652r4m83d86ykplrnm9dg5gwdvzzn8ameanlvut35wy3gpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsz9rhwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjmcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43qdwkdtx or are you creating a separate kind 1 post for the quote when the user adds a comment?
▲ ▼
PABLOF7z | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 no, I think conveying two meanings to a single event is generally an anti-pattern, and in particular in this case, you might want to repost a highlight but not agree (or perhaps not even see) the `comment` tag; or make your own quote -- what are you quoting now? the original highlight or the `comment` tag?

I just don't see the issue with rendering optimization that is behind the idea of this DIP as compelling enough; clients already need some filtering around how to render events to avoid rendering duplicates.

So highlighter does it in the way it's been getting done: a kind:9802 is for the highlight, and a quote about the highlight is a kind:1 with a q tag of the highlight 🤷‍♂️
▲ ▼
jb55 | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 > clients already need some filtering around how to render events to avoid rendering duplicates

nah
▲ ▼
jb55 | 1 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 pretty wild that the highlighter spec expects specific feed filtering requirements for the UX to be good