FEP-9098: Custom emojis has been published.

Post
-
RE: @frequency now fully supports FEP-7888 as of yesterday!
@julian @jesseplusplus Works fine for me. There is a difference in collection
type
though (others useOrderedCollection
).I've added Decodon to the list of software that publish collections of posts: https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/pulls/644
-
RE: Against fragmentation: unifying dev discussions with forum federation
That's probably why I push so hard for discussions about fedi to take place on fedi.
Yeah, I am 100% on board with this.
By the way, Ghost already uses Discourse (https://forum.ghost.org/). Enabling federation there (for specific categories) could help reduce fragmentation @johnonolan
-
RE: Against fragmentation: unifying dev discussions with forum federation
But do any of the other projects with their own dev forum (eg FunkWhale) have federation relationships with SH?
I haven't seen any posts from them.
It is not necessary to have a forum, though. I post from my own server (which is not a forum) whenever possible, that works pretty well for conversations. The only missing feature is an ability to create new topics. Some forums support topic creation using @group mention (Lemmy, NodeBB? cc @julian), but not Discourse.
-
RE: Against fragmentation: unifying dev discussions with forum federation
SocialHub has been the most prominent place for cross-project collaboration for years. This is where the FEP process was born, after all. I suspect that the need to create an account there was a major barrier to entry, but this is no longer the case as the forum supports ActivityPub.
Cross-project forums like SocialHub can then have a dedicated category for each software they know about
There is such category already: https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/c/software/14
It appears to be not federated, though.
-----
Aside:
For the size of the group [working on federating long form articles], which as you say is not large
I wonder what they meant by this. There are lots of projects that support long form content.
-
RE: I'm often grumpy about how "loose" the #ActivityPub protocol is.
I still don't understand what is so great about this document.
Many fediverse applications are capable of publishing long-form text and they are interoperating. Mastodon had a couple of issues that prevented it from rendering certain HTML tags and prevented it from showing summaries, but those issues have been fixed. It is not clear what else could be improved.
For the most part, this FEP repeats definitions from ActivityStreams vocabulary. It introduces the useless
preview
mechanism. It also undermines the efforts to standardize thread backfilling by definingcontext
in a different way. Am I missing something? -
RE: ⚠️ We’re now entering the “extinguish” part of “Embrace, extend, extinguish”.
@steve @trwnh @raucao I was talking about the specific requirement in ActivityPub.
ActivityStreams may matter in other cases (however, as we have seen, it is not entirely clear whether "X is Y" and "X uses Y" are normative statements).
-
RE: ⚠️ We’re now entering the “extinguish” part of “Embrace, extend, extinguish”.
"the identifier is foo" does not mean "the identifier MUST always be expressed using the literal sequence of characters f, o, o".
It does literally mean that. Furthermore, ActivityPub requires identifiers to be dereferenceable URIs, so even in an alternative reality where "X is Y" has a different meaning,
as:Public
is not a valid identifier.ActivityStreams requirements don't matter because we're implementing ActivityPub, not ActivityStreams.
-
RE: ⚠️ We’re now entering the “extinguish” part of “Embrace, extend, extinguish”.
@mikedev I have no evidence that people at SocialCG are acting on behalf of any software project. Yes, all of them are Mastodon users, but I doubt Mastodon devs are super excited about the errata we've been discussing here or the overall direction of SocialCG's work.
And that is exactly the problem: there is no input from developers (I am the only active participant who maintains an ActivityPub application with more than 1 user).
-
RE: Which Fediverse services can see this actor?
@julian It has to be accepted manually. I just did that.
-
RE: ⚠️ We’re now entering the “extinguish” part of “Embrace, extend, extinguish”.
I don't know what @bengo means by EEE, but he also said
remove requirements of activitypub that have been in place for 7+ years, and without an explanation how the removal improves anything
And I gave you an example.
The OP even outlines 3 different options from his POV to start the discussion on it.
To understand what is wrong here you just need to compare those options with the actual text:
-
RE: ⚠️ We’re now entering the “extinguish” part of “Embrace, extend, extinguish”.
There are other similar proposals, although they are less problematic. "Solutions" to non-problems are being proposed and JSON-LD is pushed aggressively despite being hugely unpopular among developers.
The whole thing needs to be forked.
-
RE: ⚠️ We’re now entering the “extinguish” part of “Embrace, extend, extinguish”.
https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/404
It's quite long, but the summary is:
- AP says that the identifier of the special public collection is
https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public
(section 5.6).
- JSON-LD programs may replacehttps://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public
withas:Public
. There is a note in AP that warns about this quirk.
- One proposed erratum re-frames the current normative text.as:Public
is presented as a "correct" variant, andhttps://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public
is said to be "erroneous". Another proposed erratum replaceshttps://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public
withas:Public
in all examples.Why is it harmful?
-
https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public
is used everywhere. Even among those few implementations that do JSON-LD processing, most don't produceas:Public
. The whole problem is made-up.
-as:Public
andPublic
are not valid HTTP URIs, so you need to special-case them when you parse audiences. These variants should be banned, but what happens is the opposite.
- Specification will become even more confusing than it is now, because examples will contradict the normative text. -
RE: ⚠️ We’re now entering the “extinguish” part of “Embrace, extend, extinguish”.
@raucao I don't know what @bengo is talking about, but yes, some of the proposed changes are outright harmful. For example, there is an attempt to label
https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public
special URI as invalid. -
RE: Which Fediverse services can see this actor?
@xwyqi @nomad It uses JSON-LD processing:
Iceshrimp.NET/FEDERATION.md at dev
Iceshrimp.NET - This repository contains our efforts to continue the Iceshrimp project's legacy - in the form of an entirely new codebase, with a focus on performance, stability and maintainability.
Iceshrimp development (iceshrimp.dev)
This is unfortunate.
-
RE: Which Fediverse services can see this actor?
@mikedev @nomad The most unusual thing about this actor is not funny ID, but a lack of
@context
. Mastodon doesn't like this, for some reason -
RE: Which Fediverse services can see this actor?
@julian The next test is to follow it :)
-
RE: Which Fediverse services can see this actor?
@coolboymew I made a post for you too