Updating naming conventions for postgate-related attributes #2701
Conversation
estrattonbailey
force-pushed
the
postgate-naming-tweaks
branch
from
4306bf3 to
f2c962a
Compare
| @@ -16,16 +16,16 @@ | |||
| "format": "at-uri", | |||
| "description": "Reference (AT-URI) to the post record." | |||
| }, | |||
| "detachedQuotes": { | |||
| "detachedEmbeddingUris": { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While we're in here I wonder if we may want to sync-up the terminology on embed views. Currently there's a #viewRemoved lexicon that gets used within the posts listed on this field. For consistency perhaps that should become #viewDetached.
| }, | ||
| "quotepostRules": { | ||
| "embeddingRules": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On threadgate records the corresponding property is called allow, which contains the rules determining whether a given reply is allowed.
I am not opposed to embeddingRules, though if we want to be really consistent with threadgates it might become something like allowEmbedding. I'll leave it up to you and @brianolson whether you want to adopt that change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
a few people noted that an empty list of allow rules being implicitly deny is less clear than an explicit deny rule. it's also a little weird because nil-record is different than empty-record. so I'm in favor of the explicit deny rule. I think this implicitly makes the logic that you can have deny rules and allow rules, and I'd interpret an allow rule as superseding the deny rule. {deny *, allow foo, allow bar} does allow foo and bar
No description provided.