I am not sure what is correct to put in kbin-core/issues without cluttering it up with somewhat speculative requests. I have no idea how to implement this or whether it is possible. So I will post here?
This is a response to issue
#635 - Editor support for autocompletion when a user types /m/, /c/, /u/, or @
@garrettw said:
After all of this I'm left with the distinct impression that a standardized link format is needed across the fediverse for any fediverse content.
I keep wishing for UUIDs or hashes or an internal link shortener or permalink something.
These are the same post on different instances:
It would be nice if it would have a unique ID like e3d14d6c-28d7-11ee-be56-0242ac120002
across the *verse. I can't be the first person to think of this right? Why is ity either not a good idea, or not a viable idea?
I imagine 2 variations. I am not attached to any of the particulars... Just spitballing. What do you think?
/local/uuid
/local/e3d14d6c-28d7-11ee-be56-0242ac120002
- this link would bring the user to the post on the instance where you are viewing it.
So if someone writes in a comment:
check out [this post](/local/e3d14d6c-28d7-11ee-be56-0242ac120002)!
and you are viewing it on beehaw, it renders like this:
<p>check out <a href="https://beehaw.org/post/6759290">this post</a>!</p>
if you are viewing it on kbin.social, it renders like this:
<p>check out <a href="https://kbin.social/m/firefox@fedia.io/t/237162">this post</a>!</p>
/orig/uuid
On the other hand we need a way to link to the particular item as it appears "originally". To do this, you could write:
check out [this post](/orig/e3d14d6c-28d7-11ee-be56-0242ac120002)!
And irrespective of where you are looking at it, it will render like this:
<p>check out <a href="https://fedia.io/m/firefox/t/132144">this post</a>!</p>
I am not 100% sure if the correct behaviour for this is to link to the community home instance or the poster's home instance? I went with community home but maybe there is argument for the other way, or for both.
Hope you feel better soon!
I have to say that I agree with others there are significant structural issues with the benevolent dictatorship type governance model. A team of people with diverse skills, strengths, weaknesses, commitments and all that is needed to bring a project like this to its potential.
Establishing a committee of some sort to share the work is really going to allow your efforts to shine to a greater degree and highlight your contributions, not diminish them. Perhaps getting in touch with some organization like Software Freedom Conservancy for advice? They exist to help with this sort of thing: