activitypub should have defined a `Reply` activity and the `replies` collection should have contained these activities
-
-
@trwnh if your questions are an attempt to engage in Socratic dialogue, I withhold consent!
Evan Prodromou (@evan@cosocial.ca)
I do not consent to instruction via Socratic method.
CoSocial (cosocial.ca)
-
@evan evan, not only did i read your book, i also reviewed it for o'reilly at your request. the topic at hand is about reply notifications and reply acknowledgements, two things which are not specified in the activitypub TR. we have Like+likes and Announce+shares, and to some extent we have Follow+followers, but everything else is left as an afterthought perhaps stuffed in a Create. i'm very confused what this kind of response is supposed to mean.
-
@trwnh if your questions are an attempt to engage in Socratic dialogue, I withhold consent!
Evan Prodromou (@evan@cosocial.ca)
I do not consent to instruction via Socratic method.
CoSocial (cosocial.ca)
@evan it's a genuine question, which you may ignore.
-
@evan evan, not only did i read your book, i also reviewed it for o'reilly at your request. the topic at hand is about reply notifications and reply acknowledgements, two things which are not specified in the activitypub TR. we have Like+likes and Announce+shares, and to some extent we have Follow+followers, but everything else is left as an afterthought perhaps stuffed in a Create. i'm very confused what this kind of response is supposed to mean.
@trwnh so, the way you let someone know you replied to them is that you include the original object as the `inReplyTo` property of your reply object. You then send them the `Create` activity that creates your reply by including them in the addressing properties of the `Create` activity. The OP adds the reply object to the original object's `replies` collection. Many servers do this automatically, but it's possible to let the recipient approve or reject replies they receive.
-
@trwnh so, the way you let someone know you replied to them is that you include the original object as the `inReplyTo` property of your reply object. You then send them the `Create` activity that creates your reply by including them in the addressing properties of the `Create` activity. The OP adds the reply object to the original object's `replies` collection. Many servers do this automatically, but it's possible to let the recipient approve or reject replies they receive.
@trwnh they can send an `Add` or `Approve` activity to let the other recipients of the original object know that a new reply has been added.
-
@trwnh they can send an `Add` or `Approve` activity to let the other recipients of the original object know that a new reply has been added.
@trwnh the original author can also add the object to the `thread`, which contains the full reply tree.
-
@trwnh the original author can also add the object to the `thread`, which contains the full reply tree.
@evan the only point i'm trying to make here is that a Create is a "notification that someone created something", not a "notification that someone replied". if you have something which is both a reply and a quote and who knows what else, then you are overloading the Create with highly specific introspection and possibly complex boolean logic (Create AND object.inReplyTo NOT (object.tag[*] is Link AND Link.rel = _misskey_quote))
a simple match on the top-level type array could suffice!
-
i don't wanna be too much of a crank but i do think that the way that a lot of things have gone over the past decade or so have been more or less a mistake from which we might not ever be able to repay the technical debt
@infinite love ⴳwe might not ever be able to repay the technical debt
I think that's a bit pessimistic.
#ActivityPub today is where HTML was in the early 2000s - underspecified, and everyone did it differently - but we recovered from that, through a concerted standardisation effort and a lot of patience, and I don't see why that can't happen to ActivityPub too. -
@infinite love ⴳ
we might not ever be able to repay the technical debt
I think that's a bit pessimistic.
#ActivityPub today is where HTML was in the early 2000s - underspecified, and everyone did it differently - but we recovered from that, through a concerted standardisation effort and a lot of patience, and I don't see why that can't happen to ActivityPub too.@fentiger what if activitypub is ultimately the wrong path for the web? (see my immediate follow-up about feeds and syndication)
