@astro@c3d2.social yeah I can't reproduce it anymore. Both qwen and I must've hallucinated <img class="not-responsive emoji" src="https://activitypub.space/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f627.png?v=4459463b5a0" title=":anguished:" /> I'll let you know if it happens again.

@maddyunderstars hey @shlee have you organized any in person stuff out there?

Good idea (esp. the optional). Do we know other protocols in the W3C space, that use this already?

No, just a regular reply with nothing but an emoji in its content. Not sure how that'd work for custom emoji of course. I personally wouldn't send emoji reactions this way but one can argue semantically they achieve the same effect.

@mariusor AI costs a lotta resources, but simple microblogging isn't cheap either :)

Esteemed #Fediverse –the #ActivityPub #ClientToServer API is magic. For menschys we are currently implementing the new specs. There are multiple drafts already, e.g. Auth https://swicg.github.io/activitypub-api/basicprofile with according Metadata https://client.dev/ and example in https://github.com/swicg/activitypub-api Seek https://swicg.github.io/activitypub-api/seekitem Autocomplete https://swicg.github.io/activitypub-api/autocomplete Server Sent Eventshttps://swicg.github.io/activitypub-api/sse #fedidev #oauth #seek #autocomplete #c2s/ @clemensg

@hongminhee @fedify about above;We just finished the first Social CG Dev meeting after the summer break [thus not the real first tuesday this month] …There will be some even new properties in the Data Portability Draft. I summed up the new C2S spec drafts here:https://digitalcourage.social/@sl007/117189119258003701And then there is a Special Community Call for next Tuesday :https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/4b3419c9-0d4c-460f-8a32-b575acd87b6c/

@julian Feel free to abuse @actor@didkey.000090000.xyz or @dimkr@didkey.000090000.xyz

@maddyunderstars An activity without id and actor can't be authenticated:- The receiving server can't use the HTTP signature because it can't check Key.owner == Activity.actor when there is no actor.- The receiving server can't verify activity by fetching it from the origin, because there is no idMaybe this batch-Add activity is a special activity that differs from all other activities and should be unwrapped without authentication? In my opinion, the case for such "special activity" is not sufficiently strong.@technical-discussion

@maddyunderstarsThe object of the Add is a Collection, which would usually mean to add the collection obviouslyYou can introduce a new activity type, which will have different semantics.e.g. DeliverBatch-----startTime: The creation time of the chronologically first activity in this batch.I suggest clarifying what "creation time" means. Is it the value of the published property of an activity?DeliveryThe Add activity in the example does not have the id, actor and to properties, which are usually required.ProcessingShould receiving servers add Add activities to inbox collections?@technical-discussion

I am pleased to announce three new open source products available for testing: FediPod - serverless access to the Fediverse & ATProto from a pod and a local agent FediPod Gateway - a thin spam-filtering gateway shared by multiple FediPod accounts FediPod Server - a full Solid + ActivityPub server as a CSS component To create a FediPod account and/or sign on to a gateway, see https://fedipod.net To run a gateway or server, see : https://github.com/jeff-zucker/FediPod Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, AFAIK, FediPod is a full ActivityPub server, on both of the spec's profiles: server-to-server (§7) and client-to-server (§6) — POST /ap/outbox on the agent takes an activity (or a bare Note) and does the id-minting, side-effects and delivery, authenticated by a Solid-OIDC token whose WebID is the owner's. The Mastodon REST API is the everyday client interface; C2S is the spec's own. Group actors follow FEP-1b12: a carried post names the group as its audience, the moderator roster is published as the actor's attributedTo, a followed group's announced Delete of a post it carried is honoured, and the group's own moderation is announced to the membership. The FEP-4ccd pending-follow collections and the FEP-c648 blocked collection are published as owner-only documents.

@liaizon not yet

@maddyunderstars- FEP-0499: Delivering to multiple inboxes with a multibox endpoint (not about batching but could be repurposed for that)- FEP-1a11: Send Announces Containing Many Activities (batching for FEP-1b12 applications)- FEP-3ab2: ActivityPub Event Streaming API (this is for clients but might contain some interesting ideas)

I will say that adoption of RFC 9421 is a more difficult than anticipated because many of us hacked our cavage-12 implementations in by testing against Mastodon. Specifically, I remember a very old (and outdated even then!) blog post by @gargron@mastodon.social about how Signatures were implemented by Mastodon, and that formed the basis of how NodeBB signed its messages. I'm glad we're moving on but I think for the majority of us, having a reliable library to do the heavy lifting is important. Don't roll your own HTTP signatures folks!

I wrote up some recommendations about implementing paginated collections. https://ghost.evanp.me/implementing-pagination-for-activitypub-collections/ tl;dr (read the full article for the whys): Have big pages – 128 or 256 items per page. Inline the items for small collections. If you're already using offset pagination, change to cursor pagination ASAP. If you're implementing from scratch, consider using bucket pagination.

@fentiger just btw; I hope, all of this will make my IndieWebCamp Brighton demo of broken registerProtocolHandlers obsolete :) https://www.youtube.com/live/W70wd56i0Bg?t=2030s@jaffathecake Once I had BrowserId then the renamed Persona then WebId and now it is https://developer.mozilla.org/de/docs/Web/API/FedCM_API I suppose.Demos https://fedcm-demo-rp.dev/menu Some articles said that Firefox will ship it in 2025 / 2026 - is that still true ?#indieweb #indieauth #activitypub #federation #oauth

Hi @haubles@hachyderm.io — is this for chat or group discussions?

@mooooooo @mapache thank YOU. Your work is important to all of us. Thank you for doing it.

@mooooooo @mapache you saw this right? https://github.com/Unisys/NSign

@julian Do we have a #DotNet library or DLL or whatevs for implementing HTTP Message Signatures? If not, can someone please take @Interledger 's money and extract their implementation into a library?https://interledger.org/grant/open-payments-sdk@mooooooo @mapache @zotan @kopper