Damus
fiatjaf profile picture
fiatjaf
@fiatjaf
Alby has started to return a {created: true} object from webln.enable() calls, which is not in the spec (the spec says to return an empty Promise).

Now some websites are relying on that {created: true} object being present and assuming webln doesn't exist otherwise, which makes it so they won't work on any other extension or environment that correctly implements the webln standard but not the "Alby standard".

In this case it might be a silly example, but this is how protocols die.
2513❤️26🤙19♥️11👀1🔥1
w3ird_ · 162w
what is the point of returning the object? also if enough people are relying on it, is it worth considering adding it to the spec?
UNLICENSED MONEY TRANSMITTER · 162w
the explorer disease
geeknik · 162w
They must have hired some former Google and Microsoft engineers 😂
Deleted Account · 162w
They don't care about specs, not even the ones they write. They have incorrectly formed NWC URIs and going around replacing NWC string input boxes with proprietary "log in with alby" buttons across all nostr clients.
DELETED · 162w
I spent long enough in distributed systems to learn that schemas, not specs, were the appropriate way to enforce backwards compliability. A friend of mine launched https://buf.build/ just a bit ago. He's looking to bring Google's intetnal protobuf secret sauce to all.
bumi · 162w
I thought this is how standards are started and evolved? isn't that also how nostr does things?
N3WD3V · 162w
So we got better things then alby on the way ?
Cameri🐦‍🔥 · 160w
nostr:npub1xv8mzscll8vvy5rsdw7dcqtd2j268a6yupr6gzqh86f2ulhy9kkqmclk3x cc