Since it's the end of the week, you might be wondering: where's FediMod FIRES 1.0.0?
Technical Discussion
2
Posts
1
Posters
0
Views
-
Since it's the end of the week, you might be wondering: where's FediMod FIRES 1.0.0?
It's coming, I just decided to add some more features, and most of my week was:
- meetings (7 of them!)
- sorting out things for the ActivityPub Trust & Safety Taskforce
- setting up some infrastructure for SWICG taskforces to use since one thing broke & I needed to update it.So I didn't get to work on FediMod FIRES as much as I wanted to.
-
Since it's the end of the week, you might be wondering: where's FediMod FIRES 1.0.0?
It's coming, I just decided to add some more features, and most of my week was:
- meetings (7 of them!)
- sorting out things for the ActivityPub Trust & Safety Taskforce
- setting up some infrastructure for SWICG taskforces to use since one thing broke & I needed to update it.So I didn't get to work on FediMod FIRES as much as I wanted to.
The thing I'm adding to FIRES is the ability to label data as you import it.
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@julian @mariusor @helge
fwiw, letterbook is fine with that
https://github.com/Letterbook/Letterbook/blob/6bf60b1b3d37a8b5d49a1d2554bfd5e4468f00de/Source/Letterbook.Api/ActivityPub/ActorController.cs#L309
-
The thing I'm adding to FIRES is the ability to label data as you import it.
-
trwnh@mastodon.social it's less so that I want receivers to do what I want (the ship has sailed on that), but rather that we have the opportunity to provide some guidance on preferred behaviour.
What's clear here is that there are going to be two separate actions, "Delete object and all children, recursively", or "Delete object but retain children".
We're discussing the best way to represent those two actions.
cc rimu@piefed.social nutomic@lemmy.ml silverpill@mitra.social
-
Since it's the end of the week, you might be wondering: where's FediMod FIRES 1.0.0?
It's coming, I just decided to add some more features, and most of my week was:
- meetings (7 of them!)
- sorting out things for the ActivityPub Trust & Safety Taskforce
- setting up some infrastructure for SWICG taskforces to use since one thing broke & I needed to update it.So I didn't get to work on FediMod FIRES as much as I wanted to.
-
@julian @rimu @nutomic @melroy @BentiGorlich the complicating factor here is not what other people do, but that you would be using the terms incorrectly or imprecisely according to their definition. this happens all the time in natural language where people sometimes use words they don't fully understand or use them with definitions not matching consensus. it's how we get people saying "literally" for things that are not literal, and other such slang.
-
@julian @rimu @nutomic @melroy @BentiGorlich is this a problem? it seems to only be a problem if you require the others to behave exactly as you do. the same "issue" applies to any activity in general. say you send a Delete; the others can do what they want:
- purge all children
- orphan all backlinked objects
- replace with a tombstone
- rewrite content to say "this post is deleted"
- ignore your activity as unauthorized or invalid or spamthe intent could be clearer...
-
@mariusor @julian @helge i don't think "all the ancestors" makes sense for inReplyTo. by doing that, you are claiming that your post is a response to every post in the thread above it. multiple inReplyTo still makes sense but should be used only where you are actually responding to certain things. if you want ancestors, define a property "ancestors" which is a list of ancestors ordered in a specific way (like in the mastodon api)
-
@thisismissem @nutomic it's not a JSON-LD thing. it's the lack of schematic constraint within the Activity Vocabulary. any property not defined as "functional" can have more than one value.
