1703789
results for "*"
-
hashtags had tons of prior art (usage, humans using them for decades) with IRC. slashtags had zero
[tantek]
at
2025-12-17 22:49
-
the comparisons are missing many key points
[tantek]
at
2025-12-17 22:48
-
they certainly try. and not all attempts succeed, that's my point. slashtags were DOA
[tantek]
at
2025-12-17 22:46
-
i can follow up in -dev but the general indieweb part i am trying to say is that people make do with what they have
trwnh
at
2025-12-17 22:43
-
oops
trwnh
at
2025-12-17 22:42
-
friendly reminder trwnh, it looks like this conversation is getting pretty technical (Microformats, headers), can you take it to #indieweb-dev
Loqi
at
2025-12-17 22:42
-
if the author only has control over the .p-content and cannot set their own html tags or http headers, then they will reinvent equivalents within the plain-text content
trwnh
at
2025-12-17 22:42
-
something else if it follows a certain profile
trwnh
at
2025-12-17 22:41
-
most formats have a sort of separation between header and body, metadata and content. twitterlikes don't let you make arbitrary claims, and you can only control the plain text content. so really it's just one more matroska doll you have to unwrap -- you get an http message, unwrap it for the body content which is usually html, then unwrap the html to get the real content (say a .h-entry .p-content), but you can unwrap that plain text to get
trwnh
at
2025-12-17 22:41
-
re: "visual noise" i would say that people are doing the best they can using communication formats that are too limited. i'm doing so in this very irc message by saying "re:" to indicate that i am replying or responding to a specific thing
trwnh
at
2025-12-17 22:38
Sort by:
Filter results by:
Tag
Query took 0.1s.
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