Comment on Social Web Foundation is Betting Big on Client-to-Server API

Jumuta@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

• otter@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  I blame all the similar sounding terms and organizations in the fediverse space. It’s actually pretty cool

  What SWF is:

  In a gesture that’s been a long time coming, Evan Prodromou, co-author of the ActivityPub protocol, has launched The Social Web Foundation. The organization aims to tackle the various headaches and challenges the ActivityPub ecosystem has faced over the last decade of its development. Their mission? A bigger, better Fediverse.

  From this article:

  the SWF has been working on several interesting projects outside of these stated scopes, and it’s something Evan Prodromou has been bullish about: leveraging the ActivityPub Client-to-Server API. Historically, this piece of the ActivityPub protocol is rarely ever implemented, due to complexity as well as the fact that Mastodon’s own client API has seen widespread adoption.

  source

  • Jumuta@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    that’s pretty interesting I guess, having standard activitypub servers would be pretty good for reducing connectivity complexity as well I assume

    source
• deadsuperhero@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Yeah, it’s not great. Unfortunately, there’s not a great way to describe this stuff without either leaning into abstract terms, or using oversimplifications.

  The short of it is: only half of the ActivityPub protocol really got adopted by most of the Fediverse: the stuff that lets servers talk to each other. The other half would allow for a lot of cool things to be built, with not everything being its own Fediverse server.

  source

  • Jumuta@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Surely they could’ve just included some reference to activitypub, e.g. “Social Web Foundation is Betting Big on ActivityPub Client-to-Server API”. that’s so much clearer

    source