Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   pettter (pettter@mastodon.acc.umu.se)'s status on Friday, 22-Sep-2023 20:56:11 JST pettter

   in reply to

   • Evan Prodromou

   @evan Who are you talking about now, more specifically?

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Friday, 22-Sep-2023 20:56:12 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     So, why would someone spread these false claims?

     The reason is simple: they want to fork ActivityPub.

     If we update and maintain the official document, no one will look at their fork.

     So, they need to block the effort to update and maintain the document.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Friday, 22-Sep-2023 20:56:13 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     An updated document would be clearer and easier to understand. Developers wouldn't have to go back and forth between the document and the ERRATA.

     It would not have new features. Those happen in the Community Group, or in FEPs, which, again, anyone can join.

     If you oppose forming a working group, that means you oppose having an updated document, and it means you want things to be harder for developers, so we have less software and less fediverse.

     Maybe you shouldn't oppose that.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Friday, 22-Sep-2023 20:56:14 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     The second false claim is that companies are trying to take over ActivityPub.

     As the person currently maintaining the spec, I can say pretty conclusively that there aren't a cabal of companies slavering to take over the work.

     As always, the work is being done by volunteers, like me, every day and every week.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Friday, 22-Sep-2023 20:56:15 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     One person has been spreading the false claim that only W3C member companies could participate in the WG. This is not true.

     There were dozens of non-member participants in the original WG that created ActivityPub. I was not a member, even though I was chair, nor were most of the other AP authors.

     If we charter another WG, people who want to join will be able to join.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Friday, 22-Sep-2023 20:56:16 JST Evan Prodromou

     I want to get some things clear about the potential re-chartering of the Social Web Working Group.

     The focus is extremely tight: to make editorial and other corrections to ActivityPub and Activity Streams 2.0.