this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2023
13 points (100.0% liked)
Programming
13373 readers
1 users here now
All things programming and coding related. Subcommunity of Technology.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You actually described my expectation in that last paragraph. I fully expected to have to invent a curated list of endpoints. What I instead found was that even given an endpoint (like beehaw.org) there is no way to discover what is on that instance. Which is a big issue. I've discussed this a bit (albeit extremely slowly) with the folks in the activitypub irc, and pretty much got it confirmed. If you want to develop a service that is intent on delivering any form of public content at all, supporting activitypub, then you have no protocol based way of communicating this content to anyone. So going by that the lemmy implementation is actually "correct", in as much as the protocol simply fails to provide guidance for this critical step.
That's not really the protocol's job though. We use HTTP as the protocol for APIs on the web, but HTTP does not require any specific endpoints -- that's up to the application itself. Ultimately I think this is a pain point caused by the relative immaturity of the ActivityPub ecosystem, and over time I suspect the way that services define their APIs will become more uniform (likely with the help of libraries/interfaces that define common functionality or help bridge the gap between different implementations). In the meantime it's pretty rough going though, and we'll see if some big players joining the space (Meta is rumored to be working on a Twitter competitor using ActivityPub) help define de-facto standards to make it easier.