Format docs

doc/nostr/nip-place-photos.md

@@ -29,7 +29,8 @@ Identifies the exact place the media depicts using an external identifier (as de
 ```json
 ["i", "osm:node:123456"]
 ```
-* For OSM POIs, `<type>` MUST be one of: `node`, `way`, `relation`.
+
+- For OSM POIs, `<type>` MUST be one of: `node`, `way`, `relation`.
 
 #### 2. `g` — Geohash
 
@@ -61,9 +62,9 @@ Clients SHOULD include `alt` (accessibility descriptions), `dim` (dimensions), `
 
 ### Optional Tags
 
-* `t`: Hashtags for categorization (e.g., `["t", "food"]`, `["t", "architecture"]`).
+- `t`: Hashtags for categorization (e.g., `["t", "food"]`, `["t", "architecture"]`).
-* `content-warning`: If the media contains NSFW or sensitive imagery.
+- `content-warning`: If the media contains NSFW or sensitive imagery.
-* `published_at`: Unix timestamp of when the photo was originally taken or published.
+- `published_at`: Unix timestamp of when the photo was originally taken or published.
 
 ## Example Event
 
@@ -80,7 +81,8 @@ Clients SHOULD include `alt` (accessibility descriptions), `dim` (dimensions), `
     ["g", "xn0m7h"],
     ["g", "xn0m7hwq"],
 
-    ["imeta",
+    [
+      "imeta",
       "url https://example.com/ramen.jpg",
       "m image/jpeg",
       "dim 1080x1080",

doc/nostr/nip-place-reviews.md

@@ -8,10 +8,10 @@ This NIP defines a standardized event format for decentralized place reviews usi
 
 The design prioritizes:
 
-* Small event size
+- Small event size
-* Interoperability across clients
+- Interoperability across clients
-* Flexibility for different place types
+- Flexibility for different place types
-* Efficient geospatial querying using geohashes
+- Efficient geospatial querying using geohashes
 
 ## Event Kind
 
@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@ Additional tags MAY be included by clients but are not defined by this specifica
 
 This NIP reuses and builds upon existing Nostr tag conventions:
 
-* `i` tag: see NIP-73 (External Content Identifiers)
+- `i` tag: see NIP-73 (External Content Identifiers)
-* `g` tag: geohash-based geotagging (community conventions)
+- `g` tag: geohash-based geotagging (community conventions)
 
 Where conflicts arise, this NIP specifies the behavior for review events.
 
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ Identifies the reviewed place using an external identifier. OpenStreetMap data i
 
 Requirements:
 
-* For OSM POIs, `<type>` MUST be one of: `node`, `way`, `relation`
+- For OSM POIs, `<type>` MUST be one of: `node`, `way`, `relation`
 
 Examples:
 
@@ -57,15 +57,15 @@ Geohash tags are used for spatial indexing and discovery.
 
 ##### Requirements
 
-* Clients MUST include at least one high-precision geohash (length ≥ 9)
+- Clients MUST include at least one high-precision geohash (length ≥ 9)
 
 ##### Recommendations
 
 Clients SHOULD include geohashes at the following resolutions:
 
-* length 4 — coarse (city-scale discovery)
+- length 4 — coarse (city-scale discovery)
-* length 6 — medium (default query level, ~1 km)
+- length 6 — medium (default query level, ~1 km)
-* length 7 — fine (neighborhood, ~150 m)
+- length 7 — fine (neighborhood, ~150 m)
 
 Example:
 
@@ -80,10 +80,10 @@ Example:
 
 Geospatial queries are performed using the `g` tag.
 
-* Clients SHOULD query using a single geohash precision level per request
+- Clients SHOULD query using a single geohash precision level per request
-* Clients MAY include multiple geohash values in a filter to cover a bounding box
+- Clients MAY include multiple geohash values in a filter to cover a bounding box
-* Clients SHOULD limit the number of geohash values per query (e.g. ≤ 30)
+- Clients SHOULD limit the number of geohash values per query (e.g. ≤ 30)
-* Clients MAY reduce precision or split queries when necessary
+- Clients MAY reduce precision or split queries when necessary
 
 Note: Other queries (e.g. fetching reviews for a specific place) are performed using the `i` tag and are outside the scope of geospatial querying.
 
@@ -228,22 +228,22 @@ The event `content` MUST be valid JSON matching the following schema.
 
 ### Ratings
 
-* Scores are integers from 1 to 10
+- Scores are integers from 1 to 10
-* `quality` is required and represents the core evaluation of the place
+- `quality` is required and represents the core evaluation of the place
-* Other fields are optional and context-dependent
+- Other fields are optional and context-dependent
 
 ### Aspects
 
-* Free-form keys allow domain-specific ratings
+- Free-form keys allow domain-specific ratings
-* Clients MAY define and interpret aspect keys
+- Clients MAY define and interpret aspect keys
-* Clients SHOULD reuse commonly established aspect keys where possible
+- Clients SHOULD reuse commonly established aspect keys where possible
 
 ## Recommendation Signal
 
 The `recommend` field represents a binary verdict:
 
-* `true` → user recommends the place
+- `true` → user recommends the place
-* `false` → user does not recommend the place
+- `false` → user does not recommend the place
 
 Clients SHOULD strongly encourage users to provide this value.
 
@@ -251,9 +251,9 @@ Clients SHOULD strongly encourage users to provide this value.
 
 Represents user familiarity with the place:
 
-* `low` → first visit or limited exposure
+- `low` → first visit or limited exposure
-* `medium` → occasional visits
+- `medium` → occasional visits
-* `high` → frequent or expert-level familiarity
+- `high` → frequent or expert-level familiarity
 
 Clients MAY use this signal for weighting during aggregation.
 
@@ -261,16 +261,16 @@ Clients MAY use this signal for weighting during aggregation.
 
 Optional metadata about the visit.
 
-* `visited_at` is a Unix timestamp
+- `visited_at` is a Unix timestamp
-* `duration_minutes` represents time spent
+- `duration_minutes` represents time spent
-* `party_size` indicates group size
+- `party_size` indicates group size
 
 ## Interoperability
 
 This specification defines a content payload only.
 
-* In Nostr: place identity is conveyed via tags
+- In Nostr: place identity is conveyed via tags
-* In other protocols (e.g. ActivityPub, AT Protocol): identity MUST be mapped to the equivalent field (e.g. `object`)
+- In other protocols (e.g. ActivityPub, AT Protocol): identity MUST be mapped to the equivalent field (e.g. `object`)
 
 Content payloads SHOULD NOT include place identifiers.
 
@@ -296,18 +296,18 @@ Provides a human-friendly proxy for confidence without requiring numeric input.
 
 Multiple resolutions balance:
 
-* efficient querying
+- efficient querying
-* small event size
+- small event size
-* early-stage discoverability
+- early-stage discoverability
 
 ## Future Work
 
-* Standardized aspect vocabularies
+- Standardized aspect vocabularies
-* Reputation and weighting models
+- Reputation and weighting models
-* Indexing/aggregation services
+- Indexing/aggregation services
-* Cross-protocol mappings
+- Cross-protocol mappings
 
 ## Security Considerations
 
-* Clients SHOULD validate all input
+- Clients SHOULD validate all input
-* Malicious or spam reviews may require external moderation or reputation systems
+- Malicious or spam reviews may require external moderation or reputation systems

doc/nostr/ranking.md

@@ -2,13 +2,13 @@
 
 Your inputs:
 
-* many users
+- many users
-* partial ratings
+- partial ratings
-* different priorities
+- different priorities
 
 Your output:
 
-> “Best place *for this user right now*”
+> “Best place _for this user right now_”
 
 ---
 
@@ -22,8 +22,8 @@ normalized_score = (score - 1) / 9
 
 Why:
 
-* easier math
+- easier math
-* comparable across aspects
+- comparable across aspects
 
 ---
 
@@ -50,8 +50,8 @@ positive_ratio = positive_votes / total_votes
 
 Use something like a **Wilson score interval** (this is key):
 
-* prevents small-sample abuse
+- prevents small-sample abuse
-* avoids “1 review = #1 place”
+- avoids “1 review = #1 place”
 
 ---
 
@@ -102,13 +102,12 @@ final_score = Σ (aspect_score × weight)
 
 Filter reviews before scoring:
 
-* time-based:
+- time-based:
+  - “last 6 months”
 
-  * “last 6 months”
+- context-based:
-* context-based:
+  - lunch vs dinner
-
+  - solo vs group
-  * lunch vs dinner
-  * solo vs group
 
 This is something centralized platforms barely do.
 
@@ -118,9 +117,9 @@ This is something centralized platforms barely do.
 
 Weight reviews by:
 
-* consistency
+- consistency
-* similarity to user preferences
+- similarity to user preferences
-* past agreement
+- past agreement
 
 This gives you:
 
@@ -142,8 +141,8 @@ This gives you:
 
 ### Derived:
 
-* food → high positive ratio (~100%)
+- food → high positive ratio (~100%)
-* service → low (~33%)
+- service → low (~33%)
 
 ---
 
@@ -186,7 +185,7 @@ Let clients compute it.
 
 Most reviews will have:
 
-* 1–3 aspects only
+- 1–3 aspects only
 
 That’s fine.
 
@@ -206,12 +205,12 @@ weight = e^(-λ × age)
 
 Even in nostr:
 
-* spam will happen
+- spam will happen
 
 Mitigation later:
 
-* require minimum interactions
+- require minimum interactions
-* reputation layers
+- reputation layers
 
 ---
 
@@ -233,19 +232,19 @@ We can design:
 
 ### A. Query layer
 
-* how clients fetch & merge nostr reviews efficiently
+- how clients fetch & merge nostr reviews efficiently
 
 ### B. Anti-spam / trust model
 
-* web-of-trust
+- web-of-trust
-* staking / reputation
+- staking / reputation
 
 ### C. OSM integration details
 
-* handling duplicates
+- handling duplicates
-* POI identity conflicts
+- POI identity conflicts
 
 ---
 
 If I had to pick one next:
-👉 **trust/reputation system** — because without it, everything you built *will* get gamed.
+👉 **trust/reputation system** — because without it, everything you built _will_ get gamed.

doc/nostr/ratings.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ## A. Core universal aspects
 
-These should work for *any* place:
+These should work for _any_ place:
 
 ```json
 [
@@ -15,10 +15,10 @@ These should work for *any* place:
 
 ### Why these work
 
-* **quality** → your “product” abstraction (critical)
+- **quality** → your “product” abstraction (critical)
-* **value** → universally meaningful signal
+- **value** → universally meaningful signal
-* **experience** → captures everything “soft”
+- **experience** → captures everything “soft”
-* **accessibility** → often ignored but high utility
+- **accessibility** → often ignored but high utility
 
 👉 Resist adding more. Every extra “universal” weakens the concept.
 
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ Not universal, but widely reusable:
 
 These apply to:
 
-* restaurants, garages, clinics, parks, etc.
+- restaurants, garages, clinics, parks, etc.
 
 ---
 
@@ -69,11 +69,10 @@ Let clients define freely:
 
 To reduce fragmentation:
 
-* publish a **public registry (GitHub repo)**
+- publish a **public registry (GitHub repo)**
-* clients can:
+- clients can:
-
+  - suggest additions
-  * suggest additions
+  - map synonyms
-  * map synonyms
 
 ---
 
@@ -96,6 +95,6 @@ Not required, but useful for aggregation engines.
 
 Map familiarity in UI to:
 
-* high: “I know this place well”
+- high: “I know this place well”
-* medium: “Been a few times”
+- medium: “Been a few times”
-* low: “First visit”
+- low: “First visit”