Thomas, again, that number may be different from one minute to another, and I've also found it gets cached differently. I want to know the number of friends/followers at the time the snapshot was taken for the set I'm paging through. I want to know the number Twitter expects to be in that specific set.
Jesse On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Thomas Hübner <[email protected]> wrote: > the Number of ID's is the number of followers > > you also can call > http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Twitter-REST-API-Method%3A-users%C2%A0show > first. Within the result you have > <followers_count>1031</followers_count> > <friends_count>293</friends_count> > > however - you have to do an additional API call if you don't trust the > pagewise calls > > > Jesse Stay schrieb: > > Thomas, I don't see where it gives you the expected number of users. > > Originally I thought Alex said that was going to be part of it, but not > > seeing it in the docs. I only see ids, next_cursor, and previous_cursor. > > > > On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Thomas Hübner <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > You can use the socialGraph method before: > > > http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Twitter-REST-API-Method%3A-friends%C2%A0ids > > > > If you have this you have the expected number of users. > > > > > > > > Jesse Stay schrieb: > > > I was wondering if it might be possible to include, at least in the > > > first page, but if it's easier it could be on all pages, either a > > total > > > expected number of followers/friends, or a total expected number of > > > returned pages when the cursor parameter is provided for > > friends/ids and > > > followers/ids? I'm assuming since you're moving to the cursor-based > > > approach you ought to be able to accurately count this now since > > it's a > > > snapshot of the data at that time. > > > > > > The reason I think that would be useful is that occasionally > Twitter > > > goes down or introduces code that could break this. This would > enable > > > us to be absolutely sure we've hit the end of the entire set. I > guess > > > another approach could also be to just list the last expected > > cursor ID > > > in the set so we can be looking for that. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jesse > > > > > >
