Hi,
On Jul 30, 2008, at 6:26 PM, Bob Wyman wrote:
Some issues tend to re-appear over and over...
Twitter, Identi.ca, etc. implement the convention that
@<local_username> is the way to address a reply. This works fine as
long as you're only working within a single service, however, it
will break down as we move to federated systems. The problem is, of
course, that usernames are not unique across services, only within
them. Thus, if I have incoming Tweets/Dents from both Identi.ca and
Twitter, I can't really use the "@" convention without a good bit of
intelligence built into my client or without expanding to something
like: @[EMAIL PROTECTED] and @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've though more about this. I don't think @nick will break, *if* we
accept that @nick is a local dialog between a user and its uBSP (micro-
blogging service provider).
In a federated world clearly the full address, like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
, must be used to identify the source. But uBSP's should have the
ability to rewrite messages transforming those addresses to local
aliases in the form of @nick.
If I receive a uB notification from [EMAIL PROTECTED] at my
twitter account, and I have a uB buddy with that address named "bob",
is that such a no-no-don't-do-that action to rewrite the message to
@bob when I get it?
This seems to me as a local decision.
Best regards,
--
Pedro Melo
Blog: http://www.simplicidade.org/notes/
XMPP ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use XMPP!
