question mainly to proponents of quote posts, but anyone can respond:
-
@erincandescent that is indeed how i see it in most cases. in as2 we can probably reply in a different context
-
@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
-
@Craigp so is it just setting a different `context` or is there more to it?
-
infinite love ⴳreplied to the car lane disrespecter 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
-
infinite love ⴳreplied to Григорий Клюшников last edited by
@grishka so it’s just a link then? possibly a sort of attachment?
-
-
DJ Sundog - from the toot-labreplied to Darius Kazemi 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.
-
@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 Kazemireplied to DJ Sundog - from the toot-lab last edited by
-
DJ Sundog - from the toot-labreplied to Darius Kazemi 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.
-
@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)
-
@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.
-
Darius Kazemireplied to DJ Sundog - from the toot-lab last edited by
-
@tech_himbo in the case of a boost we instead describe the action of Announcing the existence of the object. if you were to Endorse a post then that makes sense as a separate activity.
alternatively from a different perspective: you could represent not the act itself, but the relation or property. generically you might have an Annotation framework where the purpose of the anno is “endorsement”.
Just like we have `inReplyTo` right now, we might similarly notify the author that we have Reply’d.
-
the car lane disrespecterreplied to infinite love ⴳ last edited by
@trwnh huh, never seen such an implementation
-
Darius Kazemireplied to the car lane disrespecter last edited by
-
Space Catitude 🚀replied to infinite love ⴳ last edited by
ISTM that the critical distinction is expectation of responses.
If I *reply* to a post, I am directing my speech at the original poster. Others may see, but it is understood that I am speaking TO the poster.
If I *quote post*, I am directing my speech to *my followers* generally, and adding some information or context to it. The message might be seen by the original poster, but I am not speaking to them, and they should feel no reason to reply.
A rather subtle matter of intent.
-
@darius @djsundog this does require an understanding of `context` as “put this thing in a different grouping”, yes.
ie if someone declared inReplyTo + a different context, and Mastodon saw it and ignored context, it would look like a “regular reply”. but that doesn’t change the fact that it is what it is.
-
@trwnh @tech_himbo I feel like it could easily be an `attachment`, especially since that can hold many objects (useful for e.g. an `Article` that quotes many different objects).
Overall, I think it's just embedding a full object inside another. But I assume a new property saying "this is a quote" for the UI would be necessary.
-
infinite love ⴳreplied to DJ Sundog - from the toot-lab last edited by
@djsundog @darius right, i share the feeling that it is presentational and functional, not semantic. in other words, saying “A isQuoteOf B” doesn’t have a meaningful definition for “isQuoteOf” as a singular thing.
At the protocol level as a descriptive framework we have {context audience to cc attachment tag inReplyTo} and i am skeptical we need “quoteOf”. but i’m trying to cast around for other takes before committing to that.
