david on Nostr: I suppose there are two ways to think about keyword search, and it depends on how the ...
I suppose there are two ways to think about keyword search, and it depends on how the results are organized and presented to the end user.
According to what I’ll call the nostr way, bc it seems like this is how it’s usually done, results are shown in reverse chronological order, and we call it a “feed.”
According to the other way - I guess I’ll call it the Google way - results are not presented chronologically. As users we don’t call it a “feed,” we just call it search results.
Is there a reason that nostr presents everything as a “feed” that’s organized chronologically, as opposed to search results that are ordered using some other method? Is there a demand among nostr users for search results that aren’t feeds? Or are we satisfied that chronological order is the best and only way?
According to what I’ll call the nostr way, bc it seems like this is how it’s usually done, results are shown in reverse chronological order, and we call it a “feed.”
According to the other way - I guess I’ll call it the Google way - results are not presented chronologically. As users we don’t call it a “feed,” we just call it search results.
Is there a reason that nostr presents everything as a “feed” that’s organized chronologically, as opposed to search results that are ordered using some other method? Is there a demand among nostr users for search results that aren’t feeds? Or are we satisfied that chronological order is the best and only way?