<![CDATA[FEP-baf5: Administrator Collection]]>This is the discussion thread for the draft FEP-baf5: Administrator Collection

> This FEP introduces a mechanism for discovering the administrators of an ActivityPub instance. It extends the "Group Moderator" pattern from [FEP 1b12][1b12] and the "Application Actor" concept from [FEP 2677][2677] by defining an OrderedCollection of administrators referenced from the instance's application actor.

The full draft can be read here.

]]>https://citiverse.it/topic/290f8a11-eecf-44bb-8554-6e2da84fe956/fep-baf5-administrator-collectionRSS for NodeTue, 11 Aug 2026 16:30:59 GMTFri, 22 May 2026 15:48:55 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to FEP-baf5: Administrator Collection on Sun, 21 Jun 2026 03:02:54 GMT]]>I really strongly encourage you all to come to the next ActivityPub Trust & Safety task force meeting: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/29a5bd4f-bb6e-4830-bbf7-7ba290e89afa/20260701T100000/

Let's figure things out together instead of just in isolation.

]]>https://citiverse.it/post/https://activitypub.space/post/2025https://citiverse.it/post/https://activitypub.space/post/2025Sun, 21 Jun 2026 03:02:54 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to FEP-baf5: Administrator Collection on Sat, 23 May 2026 02:52:06 GMT]]>> @julian said:
>
> * I have to be careful when I use the term "authorization" because if I say it three times @thisismissem will show up and start talking about OAuth2/OIDC again.

Correction: it's just a single mention that makes me appear, people tend to confuse me with a genie but we're quite different.

(Also I saw other replies here but had an MCAS attack hangover today so didn't have energy to reply. I'll try to reply soon)

]]>https://citiverse.it/post/https://activitypub.space/post/1950https://citiverse.it/post/https://activitypub.space/post/1950Sat, 23 May 2026 02:52:06 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to FEP-baf5: Administrator Collection on Sat, 23 May 2026 01:11:05 GMT]]>> @silverpill@mitra.social said:
>
> 4. The entire problem of non-same-actor updates and deletes can be avoided by using different activities. For example, Update can be replaced with an annotation activity. Delete can be replaced with Remove (from thread).

While true, this is outside the scope of the FEP. Update/Delete were mentioned in the FEP as they are recognizable, but this sort of explicit authorization* is relevant to any activity type. Offer, Undo, Bite, Zooboomafoo, etc.

* I have to be careful when I use the term "authorization" because if I say it three times @thisismissem will show up and start talking about OAuth2/OIDC again.

]]>https://citiverse.it/post/https://activitypub.space/post/1948https://citiverse.it/post/https://activitypub.space/post/1948Sat, 23 May 2026 01:11:05 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to FEP-baf5: Administrator Collection on Sat, 23 May 2026 01:07:28 GMT]]>> @silverpill@mitra.social said:
>
> Extends" is fine, I just think you're describing a reciprocal claim from FEP-fe34, so you could use that term (or maybe FEP-fe34 needs to be updated if "reciprocal claim" is not a good name for this mechanism?)

I don't know if this is truly a reciprocal claim. My understanding from a reading of the relevant section from fe34 suggests a claim of A → B is reciprocal if there is an inverse claim B → A.

fe34 solidifies the concept of same-origin trust (which iirc is only something like a line or two in AP spec?). baf5 builds upon that with an additional opt-in specificity. So baf5 assumes fe34 compatibility, but not the inverse. But we're splitting hairs I think <img class="not-responsive emoji" src="https://activitypub.space/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f604.png?v=f66a884029b" title="😄" />

]]>https://citiverse.it/post/https://activitypub.space/post/1947https://citiverse.it/post/https://activitypub.space/post/1947Sat, 23 May 2026 01:07:28 GMT