rich1.0shocknet_justin (npub1xv…e64sa)https://nostr.now/npub1xvtwx6tduaxnn9v3y7uasskl277achgu0tu2qncmc7hdsz6y2zyqce64sanjumphttps://nostr.nowThe formatting here is a little hard to grasp fully, if this could be a proposed diff on the github PR that would be ideal for review What I do grasp I think I agree with, the NIP as currently constructed is mostly a registry... I don't think its a good idea to hard code a bunch of possible metric tags into the NIP itself... Mani's arbitrary string give it more forward-utility without future changes. An example expansion in my case would be, if I want my paid services to signal that a user paid for something, or was invited/sponsored by another user, I might arbitrarily want to use NIP-85 to publish a paid_user attestation from that service so other services might whitelist them as a non-bot without their yet having a broader WoT in the form of followers etc. (open to suggestions for a paid_user/invitation NIP or NIP-85 adaptation to bootstrap WoT) I'm not sure I see the value in the W tag, seems superfluous with the kind and the fact I'd be looking for a specific tag anyway, but perhaps i'm missing something. I also think the categories themselves being part of the NIP is the same flaw as the registry, unless they're just meant as examples for a top/bottom leveling tags. This may be where formatting of the site as opposed to git makes things unclear. Basically if I were to make a diff the NIP would be half the size or less. Unfortunately can't make the call tomorrow but look forward to discussing further and reviewing a diff.