Instead of all of us having to do fancy tap-dances, the proper
solution is for Twitter to issue an error response when a sent tweet
is rejected for whatever reason.

Dewald

On Oct 23, 7:58 pm, AJ Chen <cano...@gmail.com> wrote:
> then, comparing the front part (without url at the end) of the status is
> probably sufficient. -aj
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Dewald Pretorius <dpr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You cannot compare the status sent with the status returned when the
> > status contains an URL. The returned status contains Twitter's own
> > bit.ly shortened URL instead of the URL your status sent had.
>
> > Dewald
>
> > On Oct 23, 6:24 pm, AJ Chen <cano...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I noticed this behavior a long time ago (may be a month) and reported the
> > > problem on this list, but it did not get any response from the api team.
> > I
> > > thought it was a bug, but just realized yesterday that the api probably
> > > ignores 140+ chars status update intentionally. but' I'm not sure this is
> > > the policy or temporary tactic to reduce workload on api. it would be
> > good
> > > that api team can clasify on this issue. to check if this happens or not,
> > > you can compare the status sent to api and the status returned from api
> > in
> > > your application code.
> > >  -aj
>
> > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Naveen <knig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Here are two threads related to this issue.
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk/browse_thread.
> > ..
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk/browse_thread.
> > ..
>
> > > > It is an inconvenient change, not because they changed it, but because
> > > > they did not announce that the change was happening.
>
> > > > On Oct 21, 5:37 am, Dave Sherohman <d...@fishtwits.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 07:37:03AM -0700, James Tymann wrote:
> > > > > > Has anyone else noticed a change in the way that the 140 character
> > > > > > limit is enforced via the API? I noticed a change sometime between
> > the
> > > > > > 13th and the 16th that is now causing all my 140+ character posts
> > to
> > > > > > be rejected by the API.
> > > > > > Also a side note is that the api is not returning errors, they
> > return
> > > > > > proper responses however they are the proper response for the
> > current
> > > > > > status of the account, not the new status that was just attempted
> > to
> > > > > > be posted.
>
> > > > > My users first reported issues arising from this on the 15th,
> > although I
> > > > > didn't identify the cause until the 17th, at which point I asked
> > about
> > > > > it in #Net::Twitter and Marc Mims brought the question here under the
> > > > > subject line "Bug? Updates > 140 characters return success with prior
> > > > > update  payload".  See the discussion under that thread for more on
> > it,
> > > > > but the overall upshot is:
>
> > > > > - This is an intentional (if poorly-announced) change, not a bug.
> > > > > - Status updates are known to be getting silently rejected in this
> > > > >   manner both due to exceeding 140 characters and due to violation of
> > > > >   the expanded "no duplicates" policy.
> > > > > - Twitter has not stated whether there are any additional
> > circumstances
> > > > >   beyond those two cases in which updates will be silently rejected.
> > > > > - Twitter has not stated any plans regarding adding an indicator for
> > > > >   when a "200 OK" status update has, in fact, been rejected.
>
> > > > > I am attempting to compensate for this change by checking the
> > returned
> > > > > status ID against the previous highest-seen ID to determine whether
> > the
> > > > > status returned with the "200 OK" response is a new one or the user's
> > > > > pre-existing status.  This seems to work, but does not indicate the
> > > > > reason for the silent failure, so I can't report the cause to my
> > users.
> > > > > Andy Freeman has mentioned that, in the case of rejection due to
> > > > > duplication, this is also unsatisfactory in that it does not allow
> > him
> > > > > to identify the original status which was duplicated.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Dave Sherohman
>
> > > --
> > > AJ Chen, PhD
> > > Chair, Semantic Web SIG, sdforum.orghttp://web2express.org
> > > Palo Alto, CA
>
> --
> AJ Chen, PhD
> Chair, Semantic Web SIG, sdforum.orghttp://web2express.org
> Palo Alto, CA

Reply via email to