Free cameo to @npub1s0vt...pq6j

Yes, but let me just say that many other edit NIP proposals also share the name "nip37" so we might be confusing some readers. I guess instead of the warning text talking about NIP-37 the popup confirmation could say something like: "This may cause existing comments and reactions to this note to disappear in some clients. Read more."

I am not sure if I like the tweaked-delete-and-replace flow more or if I prefer the annotations-with-benefits spec for small typo fixes (this one:

GitHub

nostr-protocol/nips

Nostr Implementation Possibilities. Contribute to nostr-protocol/nips development by creating an account on GitHub.

The second would have to enforce some limits to the amount of characters replaced in order to be decent.

Honing my placeholder text makes sense. Whatever goes there that will manage the behavior expectation for the user, and let even a rookie know how the network will react to their action. I like that the link out to more info is a great opportunity to help people coming from centralized systems understand how a Nostr wild west client on relays will behave with their usage.

I enjoyed the back and forth in the linked discussion. I tend to take this perspective since we cannot guess all current use cases or predict all future client needs: - Protocol allows key flexible functionality in a scalable framework. - Clients provide full or limited access to functionality based on their use case goals.

Short term Primal 2.0 integration of the NIP37 integration to allow typo edits on Primal, likely in a 3 to 5 min window after post, just to keep us from looking stupid when we typo something important to the note, but to not let edits compromise content that is already connected to seasoned engagement by other users. View quoted note →