Bob Wyman wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Seth Fitzsimmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> a viewer on twitter would see a message
> from "[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" to "@susan", but a
> viewer on identi.ca <http://identi.ca/> would see a message
> from "me" to "[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>".
If your Tweets/Dents were being logged to an RSS file at Identi.ca, how
should things look in that file? The file is "dumb" and can't tell
whether a reader is an Identi.ca user or a Twitter user... Am I correct
in assuming that one should consider readers of the file to be
"outsiders" and thus both names would be fully expanded with no
nicknames? (e.g. a message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
That seems good to me. Just like it is usually discouraged to use
relative links in feeds. Also, as somebody else suggested, those nicks
could instead be marked up, to point to a JID or web page. I wouldn't
use e-mail addresses as in your example.
Note that I think that (Atom) feeds should use the Atom threading
extensions to point to the post responded on, and that one might also
use <link rel='related'/> elements in the entry to point to related
entities.
ralphm
