54057 results for "post"

  • otherwise, [Trevor_Morris] is right about POST vs GET semantics, but webmentions are (supposed to be) idempotent, and can be sent by anyone, both of which mean that semantic difference is less important
    [snarfed] at 2025-11-13 21:26
  • so, with my own endpoint, it would look like `[https://]seaglade.dev/api/webmention?source=[https://]mysite.com/blog/post&target=[https://]seaglade.dev/blog/webmention-implementation`
    autumnlilybug at 2025-11-13 21:17
  • gRegor: the endpoint, although one could certainly implement it on the permalink instead. I chose the prior because that way the endpoint is a dedicated handler, and the post template page can be entirely static rather than needing a dynamic check before serving the content (I use Astro)
    autumnlilybug at 2025-11-13 21:14
  • Hmm, quick question, is this actually linking to your webmention endpoint, or to the post permalink with the query parameters? I'm not sure that's a great recommendation for publishers in either case, since the query parameters could grow stale over time. I.e. your permalinks change, so the `source` is wrong
    gRegor at 2025-11-13 21:10
  • Webmention endpoints should handle de-duplicating since the same webmention can be sent multiple times, regardless if it's GET or POST. But those are good thoughts on why POST
    gRegor at 2025-11-13 21:07
  • and your point about the link needing to be clicked for the webmention to be sent is correct, though there's nothing stopping someone from either manually typing the passive webmention into their browser (which is arguably less work than using curl to send a POST for many people) or simply clicking the link in their own post after publishing
    autumnlilybug at 2025-11-13 21:07
  • by comment-style notes I mean notes (entries without p-names) that are meaningless without the context of the original post (like comments on silos like youtube, or replies on twitter) as opposed to entire articles (with p-names) that simply reference another article.
    autumnlilybug at 2025-11-13 21:05
  • That does make sense I suppose. The benefit that I had in mind is that an HTTP get can be sent by simply typing an address into a web browser, and one could even link to the passive webmention endpoint in their own post such that the first time the link is used the webmention is sent implicitly (which is why I called it "passive" - nothing has to happen in the sender's publishing software nor does any manual work need to be
    autumnlilybug at 2025-11-13 20:59
  • The foundation of HTTP and the web is verbs, eg GET and POST. GET is for retrieving data that remains unchanged, and POST is used to create or update (could use PUT for that, but native browser support isn't as good as POST) data. This is why a webmention should be using POST. I'm not sure what benefit you get from using a query string vs a form. HTML forms are pretty easy to build and send the correct data in the POST format. General
    [Trevor_Morris] at 2025-11-13 20:56
  • It could also work with a form at the bottom of the post, with the `target` pre-populated as a hidden input. Several of us do that with a POST method form, but easy to switch it to GET!
    gRegor at 2025-11-13 20:49
Sort by:
Relevance Date


Filter results by:

Tag

Query took 0.01s.

Search tips

Exclusion
+foo -bar
Logical OR
foo OR bar
Exact phrase
"foo bar"
Partial words
foo*
Particular fields only
title:foo
domain:example.org
nick:somebody
after:2016-11-23
before:2016-11-23
date:2016-11-23
Powered by phinde, the self-hosted search engine. status