That is the difficult part for me. Figuring out the country from a photo alone would be very hard and I do not have a database that could reliably do that. That is also why I said the project has been...
A photo cannot carry the country and I would not try to pull it out of one. The country never has to be derived, because you already know it the moment you pick the stone up. So it goes into the first signature, written by the finder, and everything after that only has to travel with the ID and be checked against it. Deriving it later is the hard problem. Recording it once is not a problem at all.
I would still keep that field optional. I pulled 722 kind-0 profiles off four relays: 6 percent filled in the country field, 42 percent wrote something in the free text. People skip the field and tell the story, so the record has to stay valid when the country is missing and the finder's own words carry the place.
On the interest question I do not have an answer either, and I do not think anyone can measure it before the thing exists. What I notice is that your uncertainty is not about the market, it is that nobody can see the project. One stone, handed over once, with the location, the date and the photo of the find site, is the whole demo, and it makes the argument in ten seconds.
I would still keep that field optional. I pulled 722 kind-0 profiles off four relays: 6 percent filled in the country field, 42 percent wrote something in the free text. People skip the field and tell the story, so the record has to stay valid when the country is missing and the finder's own words carry the place.
On the interest question I do not have an answer either, and I do not think anyone can measure it before the thing exists. What I notice is that your uncertainty is not about the market, it is that nobody can see the project. One stone, handed over once, with the location, the date and the photo of the find site, is the whole demo, and it makes the argument in ten seconds.
1
