Chucking in a few lines here too ... On 14 March 2011 20:03, Derek Gathright <drg...@gmail.com> wrote: > I do it for the challenge and the learning experience.
Ditto. I worked up and 'beta'd' an archive service a while ago but concluded that Twitter was likely to introduce its own service in that area (given it had at that time lists and other services had suddenly become available 'in house) so I ceased work on it but continued to use it for my own interest. It is a one-way archive and can't be used to forward to any other service plus it is comprised solely and only of public data (tweets) of users who requested it. This -- to me -- says it should still be OK on the revised tos. > For example, where is the official Twitter client for webOS? Messages > like "Don't build > clients anymore" and no official Twitter app on webOS does nothing but hurt > the ecosystem for thousands of users. If I were a developer for one of the > popular webOS clients, I'd be pretty pissed right now. Heck, as a webOS > user I'm not thrilled. I'm sure this is applicable to other ecosystems too. As another WebOS user here I've tried the 'official' mobile web interface through the browser, and one of the other clients available, but neither have given me the user experience I'd like or think could be possible, so had been thinking of turning my mind to it. But then on Friday night without any notice or explanation my access *as a user* to twitter was suspended. As a learning experience it has been 'interesting'; the system obliges a user to initiate a ticket requesting reinstatement -- though over 24 hours later I've had nothing back except an initial automated 'received' reply -- and a set of timestamps on the ticket thread which are massively in error. I've done nothing contrary to the TOS and though I was loathe to bring it up here there is just the tiniest wisp of a thought at the back of my mind of whether my development activities have been the cause? If so this should be worrying to everyone here. Anyway, for anyone who wants to know more you can read it on my blog at http://www.alisonw.com/ But back on the main issue here, I can understand why Twitter wants to make this move -- from a business pov it is a no-brainer to do so -- but given the sheer number of developers who have been encouraged in the past to get involved with using the API to provide services it is worrying that such a substantial revision has happened. Alison Wheeler (AlisonW) -- Twitter developer documentation and resources: http://dev.twitter.com/doc API updates via Twitter: http://twitter.com/twitterapi Issues/Enhancements Tracker: http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/list Change your membership to this group: http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk
