Probably a naming mistake made early on that would have been too much effort to change later on. Clearly though, mutual following indicates "Friends" more that the unidirectional follow does.
In my system, we say "following" and "friends" like you suggest. A bit confusing, but I think easier than coming up with a new word for mutual following. You can see it here: http://madison.imby.info/p/Philip.Crawford On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Miles Parker <milespar...@gmail.com> wrote: > This question is sort of pedantic, but I'm wondering why the API > refers to "friends" instead of "followers". The API say's that > "friends" == "following", but I understand (e.g. see this nice little > article > http://andrewchenblog.com/2009/03/16/friends-versus-followers-twitters-elegant-design-for-grouping-contacts/) > that "friends" are mutual followers, that is: > > 1. I follow you (following) -> > 2. You follow me (follower) <- > 3. We follow each other (friends) <-> > 4. Nada ø > > So would it be correct to substitute "following" for "friends" WRT to > API? To keep it straight on my side, I'm going to have to come up with > a word that means "friends" in the sense of 3 above. > -- imby - in my back yard An Experiment in Local Professional Networking http://madison.imby.info/p/Philip.Crawford
