Forums and Threaded Discussions Task Force

0 readers

1 users here now

Discussion and announcements related to the SWICG Forums and Threaded Discussions Task Force.

This profile is a discussion forum category and shares content from users who post in its discussions.

founded 4 months ago

Minutes from 3 October 2024 WG Meeting (community.nodebb.org)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The minutes from yesterday's Forum and Threaded Discussions Task Force monthly meeting can be found at this Google Docs link

Apologies in advance if I misrepresented anybody or missed any crucial bits of information.

Of note:

Mastodon and its treatment of non-note items

Darius Kazemi (@[email protected]) reports that Hometown already supports improved conversion of non-note items (like as:Article) into statuses, and that this serves as a working proof-of-concept towards getting this merged upstream into Mastodon proper.
We discussed briefly the Mastodon PR approval process and how it sometimes drives away contributions
- Darius emphasized the importance of showing real user support to facilitate the merging of pull requests.

Context Collections and FEP Convergence

Julian proposed consolidating various FEPs (7888, 400e, 171b) to publish a unified recommendation.
Evan (@[email protected]) objected to the use of the "context" property in FEP 7888, advocating for a new vocabulary instead.
The discussion included differing views on the utility of the context property and its historical usage.
Darius utilized his data observatory (TBD) data set to hopefully prove that context is not a properly currently seeing any usage.

"Convenings" and Collaboration Initiatives:

Darius, representing the Applied Social Media Lab, proposed organizing physical meetings to enhance interoperability in the fediverse.
He will provide a blog post detailing the ActivityPub Data Observatory and related goals.

ActivityPub Trust & Safety Task Force

A new task force will focus on protocol-level issues within ActivityPub, including proper content warnings and labeling.
Meetings are tentatively scheduled for the second Tuesday of each month (starting November), with a call for input on scheduling.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

curl -H "Accept: application/ld+json" https://akko.erincandescent.net/objects/6d40d43e-9929-4bf9-9a9b-725ef3a682cd | jq

{
  ...
  "context": "https://community.nodebb.org/topic/18328",
  "id": "https://akko.erincandescent.net/objects/6d40d43e-9929-4bf9-9a9b-725ef3a682cd",
  "inReplyTo": "https://cosocial.ca/users/evan/statuses/113250578296473665",

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

@darius @evan @julian side note: Akkoma also emits a “conversation” property containing the same URL, which is JSON-LD mapped tohttp://ostatus.org#conversation. This is because Mastodon will pass-through the conversation property to replies, but doesn’t know about context. When Mastodon generates a Conversation tag (e.g. when its absent from the parent post), it stuffs a tag URI like tag:cosocial.ca,2024-10-04:objectId=26829720:objectType=Conversation into it. This is visible in evan’s earlier post

side side note: “conversation” is misdeclared as a “@value” and not “@id” property in Mastodon’s context. Oh well.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

@[email protected] @[email protected] Right, it gets a little confusing when implementors inherit context from the objects they're replying to (or maybe the root node?), but that's exactly what 7888 tries to codify/demystify.

But Akkoma's use of context seems to be in line with 7888 (in that it's pointing back to the resolvable context provided by NodeBB).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

@julian @trwnh When Akkoma originates a thread the context it populates it with doesn’t resolve.

However, fixing that is on my plate.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

@julian @trwnh (Well, I guess whether it resolves or not is a matter of semantics. Arguably it resolves… just, it resolves to a 404)