@julian @[email protected]
Peeps, if we could further fill in the terminology spreadsheet and maybe use this as a start to deeper map between the platforms/protocols :- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tPZXywqFZe3xXx_fV9icNHLOkSrXx3_rHhPeRmMBZR4/edit#gid=0

@shoq ActivityStreams 2, as:Object has a inReplyTo field which as:Note's inherit allowing a multi level tree/thread like structure.

@[email protected] said in Threadiverse Working Group:

Apas: bla bla bla

(apubtest2.srcbeat.com)

I have been thinking about SMPT integration and older web standards like NNTP as well. I used to love UseNet in the 1990's / early 2000's, was on alt.os.development, comp.compilers, and comp.lang.misc, tried as I could to get at alt.lang.development group but got the cold shoulder from the non technologist alt group powers that were at the time.

Also GitHub issues intergrate with email well and this can be useful at times more for quick alterts or quick replies. Thinking about this it might be nice to integrate GitLab with ActivityPub/Streams, wether this would be good in practice or not is another matter.

Interoperability needs to be our buzzword for user friendliness.

Dunno you have probably came across this but it made me laugh

Yes Plan 9 was one of the earliest sound multi process OS's IIRC.

@[email protected] @julian @[email protected] imu

Mastodon is really an extended implementatation of the W3C ActivityStreams 2 Specification.

Regarding as:Notes and Replies as I hinted previously on my fosstodon.org account:-

• The difference between as:Notes and Replies, is they are both as:Objects and they both have an as:Object.inReplyTo field that might be either a copy of the whole instance of the original Note or a URI to the as:Note. You can think of this as a normalization

This scheme is then quite versatile AFAICS. We really need to map out as many of the different protocols semantic models. Forming and providing a path for this to be performed and getting the interests and confidence of different fediverse implementations will be key.

We can and look at how we can either align them isomorphically or work out how we can produce transformations to allow conversions between different implementations.

Regarding other Fediverse systems I have not really looked at this properly as of yet, we are already getting bridging and interop implmentations we can learn from. I think relay based systems like Lemmy and others, can be treated just like feeds simular to RSS would be treated for recieving posts by subscription and for sending can be based on posting to either to named relays or to the relay of the recipient. AFAICT as the actual message structure is so simple for Lemmy anyway, there is nothing complex about this. If we can look at systems and construct archetypes then we can form a general interop model. Something like ShuttleButt might be fun but I realize there is also a lot of politics and real world issues around messaging across different networks and their communities that also have to be taken into account.

I have been looking at supporting communication between a Posts/Comments/[Nested Comments]/Likes type feed like NNTP or FaceBook and ActivityStreams. Technically AFAICS its a simple mapping very much like what NodeBB is doing nicely here, but what the users sees in the Fediverse using say Mastodon is a more disparate set of Notes (Posts / Toots) and their Replies (posts / Toots). Toot! which I use on my iPhone is nice as it forms threads of Notes and Replies. Clients are important !

@[email protected]