1. John Nye: @BarnabyWalters last time I used mozilla it was poor experience (2011), but validation of extensions was a manual process by someone.

    .@john_nye all the stores I’ve submitted extensions to do manual reviews. Mozilla:

    • gives two review options (fast and slow),
    • runs loads of automated tests in a web interface to suggest things to fix,
    • gives you the choice of which review to use, and creates a public URL from which the extension can be installed while the review’s in process

    Safari and Opera have fairly basic, boring forms for uploading stuff, and are extremely picky and unclear about exact image sizes for screenshots and icons. There’s also no “review in progress” page, but otherwise acceptable.

    Obviously I’ve not been able to actually submit an extension to the Chrome store, but I’d hope that it’s a damned good experience for $5. If they are doing automatic reviews, then the price becomes even more counter-intuitve. If they’ve automated it, surely it’s cheaper and quicker for them?

  2. Jack Way: @BarnabyWalters I think it's to authenticate devs and reduce spam.

    .Jack Way no other extension store (mozilla, apple, opera) demands payment, or requires it for verification. Also, Mozilla offers a far superior extension upload experience. Google has no excuse :)

  3. Charles Stanhope: @BarnabyWalters Is Facebook's behavior different from Twitter's t.co in this regard? (I don't use Facebook, so genuinely curious.)

    @cstanhope Twitter do indeed shorten all links, they’re just a little bit more honest about it. But I’m certainly going to make the extension unshorten them all too (there’s enough info in the HTML do to that without extra HTTP requests).

  4. In reply to a post on github.com

    @sandeepshetty @pfefferle cweiske Something new to consider: Jeremy Keith added a webmention sending form to his journal entries to help people who’s websites don’t support webmention already. Being able to test and use webmention through a human visible, interactable form is a huge benefit of using HTTP form encoded data.

    We can make this an even stronger case by encouraging success and error responses to be full HTML documents with helpful copy.

    See also

  5. Johannes Ernst: The IndieWeb community has it nailed: #selfdogfood

    This post by @Johannes_ernst sums up — loving the BMW story too, we should document that on the wiki!

    All I have to add is something I learnt at this year: when people advocate a technology, don’t be afraid to ask the selfdogfooding questions

    • “are you using this on your own site?”
    • “do you rely on it every day?”

    And if they answer no, don’t be afraid to call them out on it. It’s your time they’re wasting.

  6. Marcus Povey: Thoughts: Simple distributed friend/follow/subscribe scheme

    @mapkyca nice brainstorming, loving the idea of key discovery for private content! (I publish a link to my PGP key on my homepage, if you want to test it out :)

    Have you had a look at PuSH v0.4? It’s way simpler than old PuSH and is no longer strongly tied to RSS/ATOM content.

    Note also that the “argh my little site got popular and is dying” thing can be solved even with your simpler system, by making the endpoint an external service. Woo hypermedia discovery over well-known URLs!

  7. Ben Werdmuller: What's the #indieweb / #microformats friendly take on infinite scroll? Sick of my prev / next buttons.

    @benwerd my take: use rel=next/prev[ious] (like inter-post nav) then progressively enhance, make sure you’re not making people play “catch the footer” :)