dtonon on Nostr: I'm thinking whether it would be better to give bunker URLs a different enconding, ...

I'm thinking whether it would be better to give bunker URLs a different enconding, e.g. url-safe base64. The current format for a new user is rather cryptic with special chars and some domains hints, but providing little useful information; and it has usability problems, e.g. it is easy to copy it incorrectly after a two-click selection, since this action copies only part of it.

Example:

bunker://8cfec14dc07bcc113fc447aee962af10d17eef6f7582a905f0bb1cd49904fa9a?relay=wss%3A%2F%2Fmyrelay.test.com

would became:

bunker://OGNmZWMxNGRjMDdiY2MxMTNmYzQ0N2FlZTk2MmFmMTBkMTdlZWY2Zjc1ODJhOTA1ZjBiYjFjZDQ5OTA0ZmE5YT9yZWxheT13c3M6Ly9teXJlbGF5LnRlc3QuY29t

A bit longer, but nothing dramatic. Probably I would also update the prefix, from "bunker" to something more nostr related and suggest that it is data that should be kept confidential. Maybe "nsecbunker".
Last, I would add a versioning param, es. v=xx, to facilitate future migrations.

Opinions?

/cc fiatjaf (npub180c…h6w6) hodlbod (npub1jlr…ynqn) mikedilger (npub1acg…p35c) PABLOF7z (npub1l2v…ajft) greenart7c3 (npub1w4u…0jr5)