OK folks, we need to stop assuming #Mastodon is the entire #Fediverse and expecting its idiosyncrasies to be mandated on everyone else.

julian

@[email protected] hiding content behind summary as a CW is also an awkward use of those activitystreams properties. It effectively shuts the door on using summary properly.

What's worse is Mastodon treats summary and content differently depending on whether an as:Note or as:Article is received.

fbievan (Powered by Polymaths)

@santisbon

.... it exists on almost everything — pleroma, misskey, the forks of misskey, etc...

If you are on other sutf— then I get it but like it's very easy to see that people just aren't cwing thier post on a mastodon instance...

So like— if something is fairly standard throughout a certain type of platform made with ActivityPub — then it really doesn't matter.

I don't get the argument

fbievan (Powered by Polymaths)

@santisbon plus it exists in GtS —

fbievan (Powered by Polymaths)

@santisbon does mastodon not do what you are describing above? If not then that's slightly concerning

fbievan (Powered by Polymaths)

@julian @santisbon oof — that is bad

santisbon

@fbievan I'm not sure what you mean but the argument is this: you can't scream at people using ActivityPub correctly for not following some custom specific to an implementation (like Mastodon) or implementation type (like microblogging). It would also go against the whole idea of independent communities with their own rules, just speaking the same protocol.

fbievan (Powered by Polymaths)

@santisbon OK I get it a little bit more now... I'll have to look through the protocol again sometime later— sleep deprivation is not great lol

have a great night (or day)

santisbon

@fbievan going through the protocol specification is pretty interesting, I would recommend it to anyone. I'd be happy to share what I've learned so far if anyone is getting started with it and has questions. I even put together a diagram to help me visualize it as I go.

fe06

@julian @santisbon adding CW as a feature of the protocol would be nice for everyone, yes?

#PeerTube also has its own mechanism of blurring videos, and #Pixelfed also can do something similar.

I do want to see Fedi to grow way beyond Mastodon, and other microblogs to pick up momentum. If some kind of CW is welcomed by almost everyone, it seems something to incorporate at ActivityPub.

But then again, I haven't read the specifications, and have never written protocols.

Emelia 👸🏻

@santisbon I'm trying to get a proper CW mechanism into ActivityPub so we can stop overloading summary: https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/583

If I'm to shepherd a FEP I'd likely need funding support, which is why I've not been able to move this forwards.

Mike Macgirvin 🖥️

No need to over-think it.

#

️

Emelia 👸🏻

@mikedev we can agree to disagree.

(Also Emoji's haven't historically been hashtags in anything that used TwitterText, since that library only supports ascii hashtags)

Mike Macgirvin 🖥️

I just spit beer all over the lounge. You're serious?

bumblefudge

@fe06 @julian @santisbon the specs aren't that hard to extend, no protocol design experience necessary! tag me here if you open a PR describing this kind of property extension on https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/ and i'll chip in a little editing, it gets easier after you've written 1 or 2

bumblefudge

@santisbon @fbievan this is a pretty useful cheat-sheet!

julian

@[email protected] definitely will be requesting some assistance when I draft an FEP regarding topic synchronization!

bumblefudge

@thisismissem @santisbon I totally agree that the solution is a FEP for implementation to opt-in to universal CW support, whether it's written by someone (Em) with a deep knowledge of what upgrade path for Masto is feasible and fully backwards-compatible, or by someone deep in peertube/lemmy/etc and familiar with what would require the least or no lift from those major implementations to present a unified front. Or (best of all worlds)... both?

silverpill

@thisismissem @santisbon Lemmy is implementing "post tags" which are similar to content labels: https://github.com/LemmyNet/rfcs/blob/main/0004-post-tags.md. Perhaps you could collaborate? They seem to be interested in such FEP too: https://github.com/LemmyNet/rfcs/pull/4#discussion_r1679203468

cc @julian

silverpill

@mikedev @thisismissem I think content labels should be different from hashtags on the protocol level, but in UI they can be unified.

Emelia 👸🏻

@silverpill @santisbon @julian yeah... I was about to say that those look like hashtags but slightly different (no hash)

It'd be really great if they came to an AP issue triage or something; I'm semi often being tagged by others in relation to Lemmy work, and I'm not sure I've the bandwidth to subscribe to watch the entire project.

Definitely open to collaborate with projects on trust & safety if I can (sometimes time is against me)