Is this a product of the Groups TF? Since you're the author I'm assuming that isn't the case. It may be worth asking them to see what things they've converged on.

I understand the criticism. My reasoning is that:People who put OpenGraph tags into web pages are not necessarily developers themselves, e.g. WordPress users who are putting information into a plugin UI, or editing an existing themeActivityPub URIs can be ambigous from the user's perspective, for example, the "pretty" URL that shows the web version might not be the URI, in some software the URI uses a numeric ID (or UUID) of the account instead of the username, from which you can not gleam which account it refers to at a glance.Typing username@domain when composing to refer to accounts is predominant on the fediverse, most people who put their fediverse account in promotional material (e.g. event flyers etc) also use this convention instead of using an ActivityPub URI, so it is very familiar to most people.Unfortunately, because this FEP describes a feature that is already out there in the wild, there's not much we can change about this without breaking compatibility with existing websites. At best, we could say the value could be the Webfinger handle or the ActivityPub URI.

There are at least 3 ways to update a collection:- Add, Remove and Move activities.- Update activity.- Side effect of another activity (for example, AddEmoji).Similarly, there are many ways to create a collection. Creating a collection during the registration of an actor is a valid option, but it is not the only one.Other important details: addressing, authorization.

> @stevebate@socialhub.activitypub.rocks said in Machine-generated FEPs: > > And why wouldn’t we also apply the same criteria (understanding of the subject, ability/willingness to have a meaningful discussion, etc.) to human-generated submissions? We absolutely should. If you spew out an FEP — machine generated or not — and you disappear afterward, don't be surprised when the FEP gets withdrawn?