Thank you so much for the detailed and thoughtful feedback!! this is exactly what I had hoped for when starting to work on it, but yes, it's still not too late :)
There's a reason to have gettrustgroups as a separate method because it's the only one required for posting, so it's needed even by a minimal client which does only posting/editing. All the rest, including getcontentfilters, is required only for circle management, which is used much less frequently than posting, and not all the clients are required to implement it - the web interface is more or less adequate for these purposes. (As for me, I had never used friends' management even in LogJam, and only added it to my client because I run out of ideas what else to add :)
Indeed, the spec is stealing part of the terminology from LJ and part from DW backend. I'm used to think of the functions in terms of "trust" and "watch", but if the consensus is to replace them with "access" and "subscription", it's fine. Never realized there's a difference between remove and delete, but now I see it (hopefully).
I had thought the list of users in includecontentfilters to be a necessary evil, because they are not limited the same way as trusted users, so it's not possible to get them all in one mask. Don't know if it makes sense to include the list of users in gettrustgroups - the corresponding LJ function does not, it works with masks. Or we should not try to keep it compatible with LJ implementation at all, as long as the functions are called differently?
*needs to remember more of the code, and to think of the other comments*
no subject
There's a reason to have gettrustgroups as a separate method because it's the only one required for posting, so it's needed even by a minimal client which does only posting/editing. All the rest, including getcontentfilters, is required only for circle management, which is used much less frequently than posting, and not all the clients are required to implement it - the web interface is more or less adequate for these purposes. (As for me, I had never used friends' management even in LogJam, and only added it to my client because I run out of ideas what else to add :)
Indeed, the spec is stealing part of the terminology from LJ and part from DW backend. I'm used to think of the functions in terms of "trust" and "watch", but if the consensus is to replace them with "access" and "subscription", it's fine. Never realized there's a difference between remove and delete, but now I see it (hopefully).
I had thought the list of users in includecontentfilters to be a necessary evil, because they are not limited the same way as trusted users, so it's not possible to get them all in one mask. Don't know if it makes sense to include the list of users in gettrustgroups - the corresponding LJ function does not, it works with masks. Or we should not try to keep it compatible with LJ implementation at all, as long as the functions are called differently?
*needs to remember more of the code, and to think of the other comments*