How do we handle Groups (Reconciling FEP-400e and FEP-1b12)?
from angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks to swicg-threadiverse-wg@community.nodebb.org on 18 Apr 2024 11:22
https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/ap/object/d6d57ebe611ff9c77c15f3f272cc0046

This is a topic to track the FEP-400e and FEP-1b12 reconciliation, aka "How do we handle Groups". I've made this a wiki to let implementers describe their current status quo https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/fep/1b12/fep-1b12.md https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/fep/400e/fep-400e.md

Discourse

Currently Discourse implements FEP-1b12 to federate posts associated with Category and Tags, i.e. Activities are Announced by a Category or Tag actor.

NodeBB

NodeBB implements FEP-1b12 to federate posts associated with a category (tag actors TBD).

Lemmy

Lemmy implements FEP-1b12

[Add your implementation in here]

#swicg-threadiverse-wg

threaded - newest

grishka@socialhub.activitypub.rocks on 04 Jun 13:23 collapse

Oh hi. I'm not very active on this forum lately but I received an email about this topic, only now.

My main idea with FEP-400e was to avoid posting group posts to one's own profile at all costs. I see Announce-style groups as mostly a crutch for wider compatibility (there are even bots like this one that work on top of the Mastodon API, you mention it and it boosts). As I design things starting from the UX, I couldn't use anything that uses Announce, because that would make my desired UX nearly impossible.

Now for some other implementations "not posting to profile" might not be a concern at all. Lemmy is modeled after Reddit, which does show your posts and comments on your profile front and center. And that's fine. And it's also fine to be incompatible; you can't exactly imagine Mastodon and a phpBB forum interoperating in any meaningful capacity simply because their user experiences are so disparate.

My other idea was that it's not just walls — it's a generic mechanism of creating objects into someone else's collections, while also relinquishing full control over them. My FEP explicitly says that the collection owner can delete someone else's objects contained in the collection. I will soon start working on photo albums. Those will exist in groups too, and the way they will work is that everyone who has access to the group could upload new photos. So again, someone else's collection into which others add things.

angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks on 04 Jun 13:54 collapse

Great to see you here again!

grishka:

And it’s also fine to be incompatible

True! Albeit, I think the general consensus here is that there isn't an inherent incompatibility between 400e and 1b12. The question is more how an implementor approaches processing a Group actor's activities. @trwnh helpfully lays out the possibilities above

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/how-do-we-handle-groups-reconciling-fep-400e-and-fep-1b12/4088/19?u=angus

The point of this topic and the spreadsheet I just shared is not to contrast the two standards. It's more of an empirical reference of sorts for implmentors.

grishka:

you can’t exactly imagine Mastodon and a phpBB forum interoperating in any meaningful capacity simply because their user experiences are so disparate.

Well, I might slightly disagree with you there as Discourse, NodeBB and other forum-like implementations in the #activitypub:threadiverse-wg interoperate with Mastodon

silverpill:

Added “Yes (partial)” to FEP-1b12 column.

Thanks!

silverpill:

I intend to fully support both FEP-1b12 and FEP-400e in the future.

I think this is where the Discourse plugin will end up too.

Actually, now that I think of it, the Discourse plugin does partially support 400e as it will recognise a Collection in the target property. However it doesn't process Additions to such a collection, so saying it supports 400e is premature.

julian@community.nodebb.org on 04 Jun 13:55 collapse

Actually, now that I think of it, the Discourse plugin does partially support 400e as it will recognise a Collection in the target property. However it doesn't process Additions to such a collection, so saying it supports 400e is premature.

This is where there is some potential to trailblaze as the other half of the equation might be implementing 7888, aka a resolvable context.

I have a feeling that context and target would work well to point to the same thing.

@angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks said in How do we handle Groups (Reconciling FEP-400e and FEP-1b12)?:

By-the-by it strikes me that these implementation spreadsheets we're making should be synthesised in some way at some point.

My assumption was that the surveys and spreadsheets would be helpful to guide discussion at WG meetings, but eventually lead to a SocialCG report of non-normative findings, followed by a recommendation for new implementors.