#ActivityPub specs are basis for spec compliance.
General Discussion
5
Posts
3
Posters
21
Views
-
#ActivityPub specs are basis for spec compliance.
Current fediverse is a mixture of flavors. Mastodon is a flavor. The #FEP is a recipe cookbook for particularly flavored meals.
The fedi as it is today will never offer a home to anything that does not in some way represent a timeline with flowing texts, even if masquerading in more creative UI's. Every specialist (not really, just different-than-microblogging) domain auto-excludes itself to live in the fringes of fedi. Just by being different.
-
#ActivityPub specs are basis for spec compliance.
Current fediverse is a mixture of flavors. Mastodon is a flavor. The #FEP is a recipe cookbook for particularly flavored meals.
The fedi as it is today will never offer a home to anything that does not in some way represent a timeline with flowing texts, even if masquerading in more creative UI's. Every specialist (not really, just different-than-microblogging) domain auto-excludes itself to live in the fringes of fedi. Just by being different.
@smallcircles "today"? Are you imagining additional fediversal protocols that aren't organized by time? Space (maps), topic (wikis, library catalogs), semantics (glossaries, dictionaries), ontologies (laws, scriptures)?
-
@smallcircles "today"? Are you imagining additional fediversal protocols that aren't organized by time? Space (maps), topic (wikis, library catalogs), semantics (glossaries, dictionaries), ontologies (laws, scriptures)?
More like an extension based off of the specs that is less likely to only lead to protocol decay and whack-a-mole development. On the basis that the current specs are too flexible. #ActivityPub is de facto a protocol framework. An extension can be the protocol with more rigor, and help ease solution development on top of that with yet more composable extensions.
W3C specs give us conceptually 'addressible actors that exchange activities with object payload'. That's powerful.
-
#ActivityPub specs are basis for spec compliance.
Current fediverse is a mixture of flavors. Mastodon is a flavor. The #FEP is a recipe cookbook for particularly flavored meals.
The fedi as it is today will never offer a home to anything that does not in some way represent a timeline with flowing texts, even if masquerading in more creative UI's. Every specialist (not really, just different-than-microblogging) domain auto-excludes itself to live in the fringes of fedi. Just by being different.
@smallcircles this is absolutely untrue.
ActivityPub, out of the box, can handle literally any CRUD applications. That's a huge swath of possible apps.
All apps exist in time, and many apps like games or office utilities have an activity stream. That doesn't mean they're microblogging apps.
-
More like an extension based off of the specs that is less likely to only lead to protocol decay and whack-a-mole development. On the basis that the current specs are too flexible. #ActivityPub is de facto a protocol framework. An extension can be the protocol with more rigor, and help ease solution development on top of that with yet more composable extensions.
W3C specs give us conceptually 'addressible actors that exchange activities with object payload'. That's powerful.
@smallcircles @evanwolf it's very powerful.
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@AdamStuartSmith yes! But it will only show up if the post you added it to has likes or shares. That said, it will not work on the frontage, only on singular posts.
-
@pfefferle A question about the trouble shooting note in the instructions: "Make sure you've created and saved the template part in the Site Editor". Is the "Site Editor" this interface shown in the screenshot below (I get there via Appearance >Patterns)? I think it is, because part of the url says site-editor.php, but that's not obvious at all. And if it is the Site Editor, that's the saved template part above post_footer, right? Looks setup correctly?
-
@pfefferle I also added the php snippet to the post template as per the final step. But no block appears on the front end. I put a little test <p>position for fediverse block</p> alongside the php snippet and that appears on the front end, so the location is correct.
So, no idea what I'm doing wrong, I've double checked every step. The site I'm trying to set it up on is https://monstertoyblog.com
-
@pfefferle So, I created the parts folder containing the html file as suggested. There's still no Templates Parts menu option immediately under Appearance, but if I go to Patterns, there are now options 'All Template Parts' and 'General'. This matches the screenshot in the instructions, but differs to the text in your instructions. Instruction say Appearance > Editor > Template Parts; but (for me at least) it is Appearance > Patterns).
-
@pfefferle No, because the first step apparently hasn't worked, so I didn't move onto the next step. More likely, I'm misunderstanding the instructions. Are you saying the Template Parts option in the admin under Appearance will only appear if I create a parts folder (with e.g. FTP), and put the specified html file in it (with e.g. FTP)?
-
@AdamStuartSmith have you created the parts folder with html templates with the same name, you used in your themes templates?
-
@pfefferle I seem to have stumbled at the first hurdle.
"After adding this code, you'll see a Template Parts option in your WordPress admin under Appearance."
But I don't. I added the new function to a couple of blogs with no apparent change to the Appearance menu. There is a Patterns option but that was already there. Is that the same thing as Template Parts?
-
Hello I noticed that under my defcon account I can sometimes see no posts at all from other users of other servers and fewer from some other users, even if they are not blocked or muted. But from a Mastodon account I can see their posts. I can imagine that many users of other servers don't see my posts either, which would explain why the reactions (likes and boosts) to my posts are quite sparse. Is this a known problem and can it be fixed?
