question mainly to proponents of quote posts, but anyone can respond:
-
agnes@pdx.socialreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh For me, it’s exactly what it’s called: a quote. If I’m quoting someone else’s post, the relationship is closer to “quoting + citing the source”, but if I’m quoting my own post, the relationship is “quoting = highlighting a specific previous statement, e.g. as a follow-up”.
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to djsundog@toot-lab.reclaim.technology last edited by
@djsundog so is it enough to change the `context`, or is there something else missing?
-
tante@tldr.nettime.orgreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh the quote post is a commentary/reaction/repost+. A Quote-post only makes sense if the post you're quoting itself is necessary for your post to make sense. The relationship is important (otherwise a screenshot would work) it's kind of a reply that wants to either address a different audience, wants to shift the conversation to a different aspect of the original discourse etc.
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me last edited by
@lanodan @erincandescent so is it basically `inReplyTo` but setting a different `context`
-
tech_himbo@mastodon.socialreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh is the relationship between a thing i wrote and another thing to which it’s related not a function of my intentions? like, if i “boost” a post, without any other context, that act has a pretty limited meaning; it’s essentially broadcasting. but if i “endorse” a post, the act of endorsing rather than simply boosting conveys a distinct relationship between my action and that post; it’s distinct because endorsement means something very specific
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to erincandescent@akko.erincandescent.net last edited by
@erincandescent that is indeed how i see it in most cases. in as2 we can probably reply in a different context
-
darius@friend.campreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh @djsundog I am not sold on the idea that changing `context` in the encoded data actually does anything other than provide a hint to clients that "something ineffable has changed, do what thou wilt". I think changing `context` is necessary but not sufficient. HOWEVER, I am open to the possibility that the real work is on implementations to rigorously consider what `context` is and how it should inform their logic and rendering
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to craigp@mastodon.social last edited by
@Craigp so is it just setting a different `context` or is there more to it?
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to t54r4n1@mspsocial.net last edited by
@t54r4n1 i don’t like it either but i am trying to describe the general case where no one is dunking and the quoter is actually below the quote.
to the extent that such a thing exists, anyway
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to grishka@friends.grishka.me last edited by
@grishka so it’s just a link then? possibly a sort of attachment?
-
joelving@mastodon.joelving.dkreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh I'd say that that is simultaneously too narrow and too wide. Too narrow if it's to say something about intent, and too wide if it's about display.
I don't think the first (intent) is possible to enumerate, but the second absolutely is. Then I'd maybe simply do something like `rel` for an anchor and use `display='embed'`, `display='preview'` or `display='link'`, maybe as links in a context-collection or something. -
chris_radcliff@spaceup.cityreplied to trwnh@mastodon.social last edited by
@trwnh I would say “incorporates as direct context” rather than the “refers to as linked context” that a link implies. It was stronger when Twitter had the 140-character limit, which led style guides to declare that a canonical reference to a tweet was to include the entire tweet.
-
joelving@mastodon.joelving.dkreplied to joelving@mastodon.joelving.dk last edited by
@trwnh I see that AS2 links already have a rel property. Might be usable here?
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to a@pdx.social last edited by
-
djsundog@toot-lab.reclaim.technologyreplied to darius@friend.camp last edited by
@darius @trwnh I agree! it'd be one thing if the systems involved defined the constituent parts of a context, so that there'd be value in possibly providing a link to the original context, but I'm pretty sure that's not a thing here (yet?) so it's definitely not sufficient in and of itself. I personally don't think "quote post" is anything more than "link to thing I guarantee is an activitypub object rather than some other type of web content", and I'd prefer to see the fediverse move to rendering embedded references to other fediverse content inline, but that it should be all client rendering decisions ultimately anyway, I think.
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to tom@labyrinth.social last edited by
@tom the quirk here is that you can respond to something without addressing the author of the thing you’re responding to. response, audience, context are all on a separate axis
the open question is how to link to the “thing being quoted”. an existing property, or a new property? if a new property, how do we define that new property clearly?
“A is related to B where A isQuoteOf B” raises the immediate question of what “isQuoteOf” is supposed to mean precisely.
-
darius@friend.campreplied to djsundog@toot-lab.reclaim.technology last edited by
-
djsundog@toot-lab.reclaim.technologyreplied to darius@friend.camp last edited by
@darius @trwnh I think a client that recognized an activitypub embed, dereferenced it, saw it was a reply, and included a "via" link to the top of thread activitypub object could be pretty neat! I'd probably really enjoy having that contextual clue that the quoted bit is part of a larger picture regardless of the intent of the person quoting it. but I really feel like this is all presentation not protocol.
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to agnes@pdx.social last edited by
@agnes so it’s a kind of citation? like how you might use <blockquote cite=“”> in HTML or is it a different kind of citation.
if i had A and B and i said “A isQuoteOf B”, is there a meaningful definition for “isQuoteOf” or is it instead a combination of other factors (context, audience, response, and so on)
-
trwnh@mastodon.socialreplied to tante@tldr.nettime.org last edited by
@tante “commentary” or “response” seem to be the closest things here. but the rest of it is expressible via different existing properties — audience and context in particular.