This is something I believe the ActivityPub API can tackle...
Comment on New Social Web Working Group at W3C
MoogleMaestro@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
While LOLA is great, I’d really love an established handshake mechanism for having two accounts on two bespoke services represent the same user.
For example, I want to have a pixel fed and mastodon presence that can be authored between the two. However, you currently can’t make two accounts that are effectively linked to each other. I feel like this linking is important for further decentralizing the fediverse (by effectively decentralizing the user itself)
julian@activitypub.space 3 days ago
rako@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 2 days ago
That’s because AP as it is implemented today is crap, it’s a superficial compatibility layer on top of a proprietary (as in, doing non-standardized stuff) platform. We need to take it on its head and make AP the actual core then build on top
julian@activitypub.space 2 days ago
What is this proprietary layer you speak of?
rako@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 2 days ago
The mastodon api, or the lemmy api, or the xyz api. Eagh platform has its own. Being public doesn’t make it standard, hence the “proprietary” qualifier
julian@activitypub.space 2 days ago
Oh I see. Yes, AP first apps would be great, but getting older apps connected via AP is important too.
NodeBB predates ActivityPub (or came around the same time), and so we added it recently. It works quite well with our existing code. Not much of a compatibility layer.
hector@lemmy.today 2 days ago
I am unversed on all of this, but agree that interoperability between not only instances but also platforms like between lemmy and mastadon, and even a friend connection site to replace facebook, could help the fediverse grow to finally get a critical mass.