Oddbean new post about login | logout https://wikifreedia.xyz/nkbip-01
I think the reason standards work is at some point someone or some group decides “this is the official standard”
Nostr is decentralized and there is no mechanism to force compatability. What matters most is compatability between relays and clients that share functionality. If there isn't a shared functionality - go ahead and make lists kind 1 and notes 30023 because its not bugging anyone, just don't expect anyone to work with you on your island. NIPs repository stands as protocol level standards to ensure interoperability at a base level. This isn't a proposal for a standard at a base level, and so doesn't need to be submitted, let alone asked for permission to be a part of a core set of specs. Also, me not being a native web developer - what business do I have submitting a proposal for some functionality that is difficult to convey? I'm not wasting core nostr dev's time asking to be merged. If it is useful, implement it. If it is useful but brings incompatability - tell me to change it or fork it. Any worries for interoperability will converge on a shared standard if there is a need for shared functionality between clients, i don't even need to agree with it.
I agree with this but we need to remember that standards are there for a reason. Unless we're going with the whole XKCD comic method.
I'll reiterate, its not a core standard. Its is a descriptive spec for knowledge bases on top of nostr, who is using that right now other that our group? No one, therefore we don't need to worry about new standards. effective navigation on a knowledge base is entirely dependent on the domain it is a part of. A biology knowledge base is not going to have the same labels and tags as a literature, coding or writing knowledge base, and that's perfectly fine. So long as they are internally consistent with their users, they can exist as their own island. Now if your biology KB users and someone else's physics KB users want to collaborate but there are incompatabilities, the users will tell the developers to figure something out. If the developers are stubborn and don't want to change, they'll move to another client that actually works. Its not a claim for universal compatability. Also, never made the claim that my spec is correct or cannonical. if its shit i want to know and nostr's functionality provides the fastest way to get feedback from those more experienced without permission. If a NKB really is that important, go ahead and submit it to the core nips repository, that's just not my priority. I don't really care who finds the "correct spec" i just want it to exist.
remember all that bruhaha about nip95 last year?
that is because it was objectively stupid blossom is better but still kinda shit
There will inevitably be multiple ways of doing the same thing and all clients will need to support all of them for compatibility
Only if shared functionality is expected between clients that share the same relays. If it is expected, go ahead and debate it and come to a shared agreement on best practices. right know kind 30040 and 30041 exist on 2 relays for experimentation. No major client uses it. If there is incompatibility, tell me and maybe I'll change it, maybe not if I'm stuborn. In any case, I'm fine having my knowledge base client connected to my knowledge base relay where we follow all the typical NIPs with the exception of whatever specifications we use that are unique to our client.
"core nostr dev" ? nostr ain't no bitcoin, it has no core
Hence why we publish to wikifreedia, for fast, permissionless feedback. anyone can use it, they can make suggestions and we may not honor it, but they are welcome to use their version. Problems with interoperability? Negotiate on a better spec. Let the best specs win. nostr:nevent1qqst9sqf7ugmjc9zvmqg5pw5qzfq96jf8kq2w2fexmwygmstx3559fcprdmhxue69uhhg6r9vehhyetnwshxummnw3erztnrdakj7q3qm3xdppkd0njmrqe2ma8a6ys39zvgp5k8u22mev8xsnqp4nh80srqxpqqqqqqz20zqaw
Some group deciding that “this is the official standard” is not the way Nostr works. Ostensibly, “anybody can implement Nostr in any way at any time”. In practice, however, Nostr DOES have a centralized NIP repo that MOST people respects as the defacto standard. Maybe we’re not ready for a decentralized KB architecture, but this proposal IS in the spirit of Nostr.
In the end, there needs to be a centralized standards repo. It can contain garbage that no one uses, but there needs to be one. The BIPs repo for example, it is mostly impartial, and there’s lots of crappy proposals in there. But there’s also things like SegWit.