direct_messages/new seems to have stopped working if using
screen_name.
The method works if passing user_id.
Can you confirm either way?
--
Twitter developer documentation and resources: http://dev.twitter.com/doc
API updates via Twitter: http://twitter.com/twitterapi
Issues/Enhancements Tracke
> The endpoint is working fine with both parameters (just tested it).
>
> If you're still having this issue, think to provide more details (i.e.
> request sent with auth headers + Full HTTP response). Otherwise, people of
> this Mailing List won't be able to
@anywhere currently does not support https. As a work around you could
download http://platform.twitter.com/anywhere.js locally and pull it
off your server via https.
This comes with it's own challenges, as you'll need to manually update
when Twitter decides to update their codebase, but it will w
The documentation at http://dev.twitter.com/doc/get/statuses/retweets/:id
states it will return up to 100 of the first retweets of a given
tweet.
However, in practice the method seems to only return the recent
Retweets for a given Tweet.
Take these two urls: http://www.flickfolia.com/free shows 1
Ah, ok. Seems you need to specify count param to be accurate.
On Jun 26, 10:22 pm, Chris Teso wrote:
> The documentation athttp://dev.twitter.com/doc/get/statuses/retweets/:id
> states it will return up to 100 of the first retweets of a given
> tweet.
>
> However, in practice the
; Singletary
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Arnaud Meunier wrote:
> > Hey Chris,
>
> > The new permission model applies to all access tokens, including the
> > application owner's one. You have to reauthorize your existing acces
This is a huge downer.
On Jun 30, 12:27 pm, Chris Teso wrote:
> Arnaud & Taylor,
>
> Thanks for the response. I must say that I'm confused as to why the
> decision was made to block ones own app from reading their own DMs?
> Can you elaborate on the logic behind this deci
ferable.
> Unless you have a requirement to share access tokens between arms of the
> application, it's a great approach for separating concerns in an app.
>
> Let me know if you have any questions on this.
>
> Thanks,
> @episod <http://twitter.com/intent/user?sc
e first
> option likely being your quickest solution and also the most preferable.
> Unless you have a requirement to share access tokens between arms of the
> application, it's a great approach for separating concerns in an app.
>
> Let me know if you have any questions on
Bump.
We'd love to be verified at http://sellsimp.ly as we have core
functionality that relys on DMs. If users could Dm without us
following it would be of great assistance.
Thanks,
Chris
On Jul 5, 8:39 am, Ryan wrote:
> Searched this forum and found nothing, but apparently you guys are rolling
10 matches
Mail list logo
