Conversation

Notices

1. Steve Bate (steve@social.technoetic.com)'s status on Thursday, 15-Aug-2024 14:36:49 JST Steve Bate

   I believe the W3C should reconsider splitting the #ActivityPub Recommendation into three documents: Core/Shared requirements, S2S (Server-to-Server, "social/federation protocol"), and C2S (Client-to-Server, "social API"). I think it would reduce developer confusion and help them focus on requirements that are relevant to their work (typically, S2S/Core). It would also allow C2S to be improved independently so that more developers might consider using it.

   • silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Thursday, 15-Aug-2024 14:36:48 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @steve Yes, but I don't think that will happen. This is why I started ActivityPub for developers

   • silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Thursday, 15-Aug-2024 15:43:01 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @steve All recommendations there are non-normative, I'll try to make it clearer (and I don't intend to submit this document to FEP repository, it will be moved to another location in the future).

   • Steve Bate (steve@social.technoetic.com)'s status on Thursday, 15-Aug-2024 15:43:02 JST Steve Bate

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill I agree it probably won't happen, but I can dream. One concern I have about the FEP you reference is that it contains opinions that are debatable (and have been debated on SocialHub and elsewhere). It should maybe be called "An Opinionated List of Reasonable ActivityPub Development Suggestions." (a little long, I know 😉 ). It might help if the FEP recommendations were tagged as spec clarifications versus extended practices (like with at least some of the duck typing suggestions).