Skip to content

Piero Bosio Social Web Site Personale Logo Fediverso

Social Forum federato con il resto del mondo. Non contano le istanze, contano le persone

@silverpill @sabrinkmann @naturzukunft2026 @julian

General Discussion
1 1 1

Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
  • @jenniferplusplus

    AFAIK, it is an IETF JSON thing, and wasn't part of the original (pre-IETF) JSON.

    Here's the oldest version of the JSON spec I could find:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20030228034147/http://www.crockford.com/JSON/index.html

    It defines "number" as in the screen-shot, and doesn't say anything about floating-point numbers.

    ...

    I do agree with you that the reason IETF JSON talked about floating-point numbers is almost certainly because of JavaScript.

    read more

  • @reiver that's a json thing, which is itself a JavaScript thing. JS doesn't have an integer type, only number, which is a double precision floating point. Json is a serialization spec for JavaScript objects, and jsonld is spec for pretending that adding one property to a json document makes it a collection of rdf triples and then getting mad about it when the rest of the world just wants things to be parseable

    read more

  • @silverpill @sabrinkmann @naturzukunft2026 @julian

    i should use socialhub more... i'll catchup on the dicussion, soon

    read more

  • There is a larger discussion about fixed-point numbers versus floating-point numbers.

    And that, ALL programming-languages should have fixed-point numbers built into them.

    And that, programmers should be warned against using floating-point numbers in all but a set of very specialized situations — where inexact math is OK.

    For most programmers in most situations inexact math is NOT OK. And, they should NOT use floating-point numbers.

    read more

  • This is likely (directly or indirectly) the fault of a single paragraph in IETF RFC-7159 / RFC-8259 (shown in the attached screen-shot).

    (And note that, there is a difference between JSON and IETF JSON. JSON did not have this. IETF JSON does.)

    That paragraph (in the IETF RFC) was NOT a requirement. But, others made it a requirement — including JSON-LD.

    RE: https://mastodon.social/@reiver/115956356584464586

    read more

  • This is from the JSON-LD spec.

    ActivityPub / ActivityStream are based on JSON-LD.

    I think it was a very bad idea for JSON-LD to define "number" this way!

    It makes it so numbers with fractional values are inexact & lossy.

    This include values that are common for money.

    For example, neither 0.10 and 0.20 can be represented exactly. So, 0.10 + 0.20 does NOT equal 0.30!

    It should have used FIXED-point numbers rather than FLOATING-point.

    read more

  • @smallcircles @ben Unfortunately, the top-down approach often stalls under its own inertia and never develops into anything at all.

    If you try for too much interoperability too fast, the costs aren't evenly distributed: some implementors will have to make very few changes (usually the ones who had the most power and influence during the standardisation process), while others will have to tear up a lot of stuff and start over.

    In the business/government/aid world, that can have ripples far beyond the IT systems, right into the way they organise their operations; in the FOSS world, it can mean abandoning popular features, losing users, and even destroying the contributor culture.

    An 800 lb gorilla like Walmart can force that level.of dirigisme on its suppliers, but in the open world, we can just ignore or fork if we think someone's getting too restrictive: note how most web syndicators stuck with RSS 2.0 even after Atom came along to "fix" its "problems," for example (and Atom wasn't even that bad). 🤷

    read more

  • @naturzukunft2026@mastodon.social yes that's correct, it's just a flat list for ease of processing. The tree building takes place after all of the objects are received and processed.

    read more
Post suggeriti
  • #ThoughtProvoker

    General Discussion thoughtprovoker activitypub
    21
    0 Votes
    21 Posts
    1 Views
    @smallcircles @ben Unfortunately, the top-down approach often stalls under its own inertia and never develops into anything at all.If you try for too much interoperability too fast, the costs aren't evenly distributed: some implementors will have to make very few changes (usually the ones who had the most power and influence during the standardisation process), while others will have to tear up a lot of stuff and start over. In the business/government/aid world, that can have ripples far beyond the IT systems, right into the way they organise their operations; in the FOSS world, it can mean abandoning popular features, losing users, and even destroying the contributor culture.An 800 lb gorilla like Walmart can force that level.of dirigisme on its suppliers, but in the open world, we can just ignore or fork if we think someone's getting too restrictive: note how most web syndicators stuck with RSS 2.0 even after Atom came along to "fix" its "problems," for example (and Atom wasn't even that bad). 🤷
  • 0 Votes
    21 Posts
    69 Views
    @ret @nitrml Perhaps none!A working group might be able to come up with other, non-software strategies for dealing with this shit. Perhaps relying on new features in the software that don't actually ID anyone but could attach the status of having BEEN IDed or just let in and I'll take responsibility.But it takes actually thinking about and studying a problem to come up with answers like that. You can't just shove your head up your ass and then yell at it.
  • ActivityPub Social API Hackathon

    General Discussion
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    12 Views
    @evan that sounds fun, let me know the details of when it'd be (before, after, during?) 🙂
  • 0 Votes
    170 Posts
    317 Views
    Also, you should give yourself a break and use the miscellany context.https://swicg.github.io/miscellany/@raphael @liaizon @smallcircles @django