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 <thueb...@gmx.de> 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 <thueb...@gmx.de
> > <mailto:thueb...@gmx.de>> 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
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to