K on Nostr: yes. :os3ch: personally, i think we can define 3 generic event kinds for all 3 type ...

yes.

personally, i think we can define 3 generic event kinds for all 3 type of kinds and let different clients use them for specific use-cases. otherwise we would have millions of standards. for example kanban is something rare. instead of making standards for it, nostr kanban apps can define a way for themselves to work with generic kinds and tags probably. then we have less standards, less kinds reserved and probably the developers of specific app can define and work on their standards separately.

something i wrote about this today:

quoting nevent1q…q537

i think about nostr adoption sometimes. how do we reach a true adoption?

last time i remembered a quote from someone from whom i learned software development, i learned more than software development; i learned how to think from him.

once we were talking about one of our projects and its code base compared to another project, and he told me the point about our project is that it doesn't get more, but it gets better.

i think this will be the same for nostr. we need to get better at what features we have. make them work as smoothly as possible.

but this is only true when we talk about adoption. one of nostr powers is that it can have infinite features with a simple protocol flow. we can make anything out of it. so another path that devs can follow is to make features that look like they came from future and let cool guys enjoy them.

i love both of them and follow both paths.