@reiver@mastodon.social that's a good summary for it.
Discussion
Loading...
@reiver@mastodon.social that's a good summary for it.
@reiver it is a good question. It is also a question that is formulated from the perspective on how we currently see the AS/AP fediverse.
> I've seen an ongoing debate between "Note" versus "Article" in #ActivityPub / #ActivityStreams.
> When is something a "Note"‽
> When is something an "Article"‽
The question makes sense from the notion of what the current #fediverse is. It makes less sense from the context of AS/AP as described in the protocol specs.
Background to my post is this observation: https://social.coop/@smallcircles/116109447243110037
Then the answer to when is something a Note or an Article is: Always. Note is Note in ActivityStreams and Article is Article.
The question that you would be asking, if only we had a fediverse that followed the original promise of the open standards, is:
> "When is something a Note or an Article in a Microblogging domain?"
For instance.. types you have in any domain depend on your model preferences. Could be anything that serves needs of a solution.
Btw, I am sorry as I should've added "tangential" to the above, but was out of chars. I borrowed your post to continue my argument made elsewhere.
Adding an analogy that popped up as a showerthought just now, to clarify further what I refer to..
In a different context someone who creates a Webshop webapp might ask:
> When is something a "Product" or "Invoice" in HTTP / HTML?
It is not fully equivalent, but demonstrative of how the concepts clash, mixing solution space with protocol vocabulary in language use.
Yet this is what happens continuously in all fediverse developer talk, sowing endless confusion, but also leads to complete different, incompatible views and expectations on what fediverse is, and where it is headed.
We have a laissez-faire fediverse. Handy, as you can just hack things in. But also directionless and random.