I wrote in support of @thisismissem's letter saying that ATProto and ActivityPub ecosystems ought to engage kindly and constructively with each other.
-
I wrote in support of @thisismissem's letter saying that ATProto and ActivityPub ecosystems ought to engage kindly and constructively with each other. https://writings.thisismissem.social/statement-on-discourse-about-activitypub-and-at-protocol/
I have explained my thinking more here: https://github.com/swicg/general/pull/45#issuecomment-3263275752
We face a lot of threats, especially ones greater than each other right now. We should challenge each other, but it is worth engaging so in a constructive way.
-
I wrote in support of @thisismissem's letter saying that ATProto and ActivityPub ecosystems ought to engage kindly and constructively with each other. https://writings.thisismissem.social/statement-on-discourse-about-activitypub-and-at-protocol/
I have explained my thinking more here: https://github.com/swicg/general/pull/45#issuecomment-3263275752
We face a lot of threats, especially ones greater than each other right now. We should challenge each other, but it is worth engaging so in a constructive way.
Note that it isn't that I am unwilling to critique ATProto. I have written the most cited critiques of ATProto on the internet.
Critique is good. And challenging each other is good.
But let's be constructive and kind.
-
undefined fosstodon.org ha condiviso questa discussione
-
Note that it isn't that I am unwilling to critique ATProto. I have written the most cited critiques of ATProto on the internet.
Critique is good. And challenging each other is good.
But let's be constructive and kind.
@cwebber facts. You can disagree, and even point out weaknesses, challenges, and pitfalls without being rude or unkind. Even simple bluntness doesn't require saying things like, "any idiot would know this"
I /like/ when people point out where I failed, and things I've failed to consider so I can consider those
-
undefined Piero Bosio ha condiviso questa discussione
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
They call options related to this "feature" "get a room", which somehow makes it more annoying.
-
OK, Discourse (the forum software, not "the discourse" about any current news) made me mad today, and that's not something that ever happens. I love Discourse, but this one is crazy.
I get mad when someone PMs me, and this damned forum software is telling people to do it behind my back. This is a support forum for an Open Source project, people are not allowed to ask for private help without paying for it. It is bonkers to recommend taking public conversations private.
-
julian Oh, you're right. I never did it manually and they must have defederated for some reason.
Sorry, but I absolutely hadn't noticed this, so I'd say the problem with NodeBB is solved then
-
@hongminhee It's a place where our loosey goosey style goes into nondeterminism. We should tighten it up in the next version. My main answer would be: publishers, don't do that.
-
ska can you please check that those three posts are actually federated outwards?
The human-readable URLs don't contain the expected Link header to the ActivityPub resource.
e.g.
link: ; rel="friends-base-url" link: ; rel="https://api.w.org/" link: ; rel="alternate"; title="JSON"; type="application/json" link: ; rel=shortlinkIt does contain the shortlink, which I tried to pull with the appropriate Accept header, but was sent HTML in response.
Perhaps there is a toggle you can press to enable federation on those posts?
-
Today I discovered an interesting inconsistency in Activity Streams specs while investigating a Fedify issue.
The question: How should we interpret URLs like "icon": "https://example.com/avatar.png"?
JSON-LD context (https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams
@type: "@id" → “This is an IRI reference, dereference it to fetch an ActivityStreams object.”Activity Streams Primer: “assume that a bare string is the href of a Link object, not an id” (no dereferencing)
Result: JSON-LD processor-based implementations try to parse PNG files as JSON and fail.
Turns out w3c/activitystreams#595 already discusses the same issue for href properties. I added a note that icon, image, etc. have the same problem.
Once again reminded of how tricky spec work can be…
#ActivityPub #Fedify #ActivityStreams #fedidev #specifications
-
Confirming at this time that at least the first URL shared does not get pulled in. Debugging.
-
julian said in Can't view my Wordpress federated post:
> ska which one doesn't work?
>
> Does it work here?I'm still on the dev branch and almost all of them work, but not all. For example:
https://www.lealternative.net/2020/10/13/giocare-a-tron-online
https://www.lealternative.net/2020/03/25/alternative-ad-android/
https://www.lealternative.net/2023/02/24/native-alpha/These don't work.
In the logs, only the GET request is visible, but without the response.
Most of those that didn't work before now do, such as: https://www.lealternative.net/2025/09/10/abbiamo-provato-la-vpn-a-pagamento-di-duckduckgo/
Also, all Mastodon posts now seem to work, whereas many had problems before.
