NUD: Nostr Unofficial Documents

[SilberWitch]

This is a continuance/adaptation of the original @fiatjaf proposal for NUDs as NIP-71.

The concept is meant to reduce the need for everyone to maintain varying Nostr event lists and to have different levels of publication (NIP and NUD, or only NUD).

This would allow us to

• filter relays for Nostr specs,
• embed spec references in other documents, using nostr addresses, such as in product documentation,
• auto-assemble lists from filter results, in varying formats, or with sorting by field,
• open up new use cases for navigating and expanding the specification base, and
• add acceptance-test content or other auxiliary information/instructions

all without eliminating the primary/leading role of the NIP-repo as a "standard spec set" or altering/ossifying the source specification content.

[SilberWitch]

Some of the readme stuff is wrong. I'll correct that, later.

[fiatjaf]

The only difference between my proposal and this is the introduction of the "gherkin" stuff? Or what is it?

I don't know if I like my own proposal anymore, I think maybe it's better if people do the blossom route and just maintain a spec anywhere and we link to it from this repo in order to reserve event kinds, but I'm not sure either.

[SilberWitch]

This is about the tag metadata, mostly, and the gherkin. The prose specs stay where they are.

I just left the spec stuff in the proposal because it was in the original, but it's redundant to the description field. I'd be fine, with taking it out.

Let me edit out all the spec content and resubmit.

[SilberWitch]

I have a specific use case for putting the metadata in events, but I wanted to run it by you, before I start producing the events, because of the tag selection and the data structure.

[fiatjaf]

Oh, nevermind, I see now that you want each NUD to be a special event with a special kind that defines their own kinds and stuff? I kinda like it, my problem is just that this is too hard for most people, there is no tooling for generating these events and people will end up not doing it, instead they will write their spec in a piece of paper in their kitchen, take a picture and tell people that is the spec, and then we will link to the picture URL from the NIPs repo README anyway.

[SilberWitch]

Yeah, I know. 😂 This is advanced spec-ing.

We're going to be handling them from our clients. Just trying to do it with events, instead of going straight to a database, so that someone else can also make use of them.

I'm okay with it just being us, though. Doesn't need to be a NIP. NUDs can just be a NUD.

[SilberWitch]

Michael suggested I split the metadata part from the gherkin part, into two events, and then link them together with a 30040, along with other docs. Like a superspec.