Honestly, I'm not super familiar with Tumlbr. Could you point me to an example of this in action?
We are limited (to a degree) by some design choices made in ActivityPub long ago. "Likes", "Boosts", and "Replies" are all separate things that are hard (but perhaps not impossible) to combine into a single unit.
@deutrino @bengo @smallcircles @strypey @EUCommission @nlnet
@benpate
> "Likes", "Boosts", and "Replies" are all separate things that are hard (but perhaps not impossible) to combine into a single unit
Wouldn't it just be a matter of having all 3 triggered by one button? What you'd name that button is an intriguing question though ...
Yeah, not impossible, just awkward and fragile. It complicates interop because other apps are expecting things to be separate. E.g., how to display something if a Mastodon user just clicks one, but not all three?
I dunno, maybe we’re overthinking it. We could just shove them all together, display a “best guess” UI, and ignore the screams from the ActivityPub purists?
@strypey @deutrino @bengo @smallcircles @EUCommission @nlnet
In my quest to make the Fediverse better and get off of corporate social media, I am now… signing up for Tumblr?
This is not going the direction I anticipated 
@strypey @deutrino @bengo @smallcircles @EUCommission @nlnet
@benpate @bengo @smallcircles @strypey @EUCommission @nlnet
An outline project for this, but a bit down the lists of projects: https://hamishcampbell.com/digital-detox-is-urgently-needed/
@benpate @strypey @deutrino @bengo @smallcircles @EUCommission @nlnet
As a few people have pointed out this is kinda what we are doing with the #OMN. But we are focused on rebooting the projects that came BEFORE tumblr, but can learn from the mess of #web02 so still useful to look and learn.
Flow as a social value is something we do need to reboot in a federated path.
@benpate @deutrino @bengo @strypey @EUCommission @nlnet
Link for background: https://coding.social/blog/grassroots-evolution
> We are limited (to a degree) by some design choices made in ActivityPub
I mention not addressing "Misconceptions" early as most costly mistake of AP ecosystem development. Your sentence above will be interpreted differently by different people based on their Perspective what fediverse means to them.
W3C ActivityPub spec is powerful, based on granular message exchange between addressable actors on the social graph.
"Likes", "Boosts", "Replies" are underspecified, mechanisms are fedi-specific, follow interpretation of AP that has become common on fedi. A big misconception imho is that its unclear what is 'core protocol' and what is extension with solutions on top of it. Like a "Microblogging" application domain, or "Software development" business domain.
A Like is but an ActivityStreams social primitive, a building block. The other 2 are domain-specific. Leaked abstractions, now.
@benpate
> In my quest to make the Fediverse better and get off of corporate social media, I am now… signing up for Tumblr?
When Automattic bought it they promised to publish full source code under a free license. They also announced an intention to implement AP in Tumblr, which apparently will happen when they finish migrating it to WP;
Since 2022, blogging site Tumblr has been teasing its plans to integrate with the fediverse -- the open social web powered by the protocol ActivityPub
TechCrunch (techcrunch.com)
So centralised for now, but maybe not so corporate.
@smallcircles
> A Like is but an ActivityStreams social primitive, a building block. The other 2 are domain-specific
Are Boosts and Replies not based on Activities standardised in Activity Streams 2.0/ Activity Vocabulary @evan?
Each of those shows up in the Bicabulary specs, but they’re also in a bit of a gray area.
“InReplyTo” is a standard field, but Threadiverse conversations have extended this a lot.
I think “Boosts” are similar. Semantically an “Announce”, the original docs envision a much wider use, though Mastodon et al use it so much for sharing, that’s it’s de facto behavior now.
@strypey @smallcircles @benpate @deutrino @bengo
Likes are Like activities.
Boosts are Announce activities.
We don't have a separate activity for a reply, but we have a property of an object, inReplyTo, which is what defines a reply.
I haven't been following the conversation, but I'll try to read back in time.
We are in a new editorial cycle for ActivityPub, so if anyone thinks these or other parts of the spec are underspecified, they should be opening issues on the ActivityPub repo right now!
Contribute to w3c/activitypub development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub (github.com)
Yeah, the new work on ActivityPub is encouraging. Will this be a version 2.1? Or something bigger like a 3.0?
For me, the biggest opportunities might be to pull some of the FEPs into the spec, for instance, blessing some of the Threadiverse work as the official way to handle groups and discussions.
Is is possible that some FEPs might make their ways into the specs?
@benpate
> an “Announce”, the original docs envision a much wider use, though Mastodon et al use it so much for sharing, that’s it’s de facto behavior now
They've defined (by usage) what an Announce does in the microblogging domain. But that doesn't stop it being used it other ways, does it?
No, you can use it any way you want.
But however YOU use it, Mastodon (et al) will still treat it like a "boost".
I'm pretty sure that's why the Threadiverse groups use Add -> Collection semantics instead of `Announce`. Otherwise, every item in a group would look (to Mastodon) like it had been shared 1000 times.
@benpate the next version will be .1 . It's for clarifying a lot of the language in the documents to make them clearer and easier to implement.
We may make a new version after that. It must be backwards compatible; you should be able to negotiate or discover new and better features.
Very cool. It's perfectly reasonable, and what I expected was probably the goal.
Thank you 
FEPs by default don't have the IP statements that make them useful for incorporating into a W3C recommendation. They need to be submitted under the SocialCG CLA. I plan to submit all the ones I've authored.
We have a staging process for stuff moving from idea stage to recommendation.
Discussion of potential CG and WG charters. Contribute to swicg/charters development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub (github.com)
Ciao! Sembra che tu sia interessato a questa conversazione, ma non hai ancora un account.
Stanco di dover scorrere gli stessi post a ogni visita? Quando registri un account, tornerai sempre esattamente dove eri rimasto e potrai scegliere di essere avvisato delle nuove risposte (tramite email o notifica push). Potrai anche salvare segnalibri e votare i post per mostrare il tuo apprezzamento agli altri membri della comunità.
Con il tuo contributo, questo post potrebbe essere ancora migliore 💗
Registrati Accedi
Citiverse è un progetto che si basa su NodeBB ed è federato! | Categorie federate | Chat | 📱 Installa web app o APK | 🧡 Donazioni | Privacy Policy
