Notices by silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)

@Edent I think you can do the same trick with a webfinger endpoint:

rel query parameter is already defined in the spec: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7033#section-4.3

@Edent How is that different from webfinger?

@fox I remember that someone did that before...

@iwojima was it you ?

@fox @weekinfediverse It's just me collecting links and hitting "Publish" once a week.

@grindhold @midzer @Profpatsch @nlnet Yea, I think that's totally fine, agreements are optional there.

@fox Yeah that's possible

@fox Correct (but regular DMs are also not encrypted).

@feralthoughts

Irrespective of @ mentions, Mitra will always notify a user if that user is addressed in a post - would that be a correct statement?

Yes.

And a Mitra user's reply post will include implicit addressing (in future?) copied from parent post, so the user is free to delete the recipient list from the text of the message - correct?

Yes

But if the @ mentions are missing, the recipient application (Mastodon or whatever else) may or may not notify the recipients, depending on their own design – right?

Mention tags will still be added to ActivityPub object so Mastodon notifications will keep working.

@jupiter_rowland

@fox They are not DMs in Mitra but other platforms will see them as DMs

@grindhold @midzer @Profpatsch @nlnet What do you think about making flohmarkt compatible with FEP-0837? https://codeberg.org/flohmarkt/flohmarkt/issues/5

@mradcliffe By the way, it looks like sometimes your comments are delivered twice.

One has id like https://nokoto.org/user/3/posts/611
And another has id like https://nokoto.org/node/611

(Maybe they have different types? I didn't check)

Also, I think the attachment in this Article is not quite right: https://nokoto.org/content/jambalaya-shoppe-best-shoppe?_format=activityjson

The Image has href property but normally url is used in media attachment (href is a property of Link).

Even mentions copied from the parent will count as characters, and eat up the limited character quota, no?

No, they can be be omitted from the text.

In this comment I will not make an explicit mention, but the message will still be delivered to you.

So once conversation containers for public conversations are implemented, it should be possible for at least a Mitra OP to get notified of every single reply in a thread, even if they are not tagged. Isn’t that correct?

Yes, that is correct.

By the way, I didn’t get the point you had made earlier:

Addressing in ActivityPub is similar to that of E-mail. A message contains a list of recipients and your server delivers a copy of the message to each recipient.

@-mentions, addressing and notifications are different things.

@-mentions are often used to determine recipients, but this is not a requirement. Similarly, applications often generate a notification when you are mentioned, but they may also generate a notification if you're addressed without @-mention.

@jupiter_rowland

@feralthoughts Yes, it will be made simpler but maybe it will not look like Hubzilla.

@helge The document says that the target user is a developer, but why would I use a community server if I can deploy my own?

According to the site deployment tools already exist: https://didwebvh.info/latest/implementations/#deployment-tools.

@fox Yes, users from other mitra instances can subscribe. Users from non-mitra instances can subscribe too, but they need to visit a payment page (here's mine https://mitra.social/@silverpill/subscription).

@sendpaws Never thought of them as FOSS. Typical corporate source-available crap, I try to stay away from projects like that.

@helge did:webvh? Sounds interesting, I want to use it with FEP-ef61

Will give it a read.

@mradcliffe How do you know? They still send me requests with Cavage-Draft signatures

it feels like an unnecessary abstraction for the purposes of skirting around a limitation in the ActivityPub specification.

What limitation?

The problem is not that ActivityPub has a limitation, the problem is that it doesn't have enough. It can't be used to build a real application because it doesn't specify what is valid and what is not. it doesn't even specify what an "actor" is.

Fortunately, the answers to these questions were found and documented in FEP-fe34 and FEP-2277. Object observers are likely compatible with both FEP-fe34 and FEP-2277. Other ideas are not compatible.

In your proposed structure (feel free to correct if wrong), a resolvable context would declare an observer property pointing to an Actor, who would be federating actions out on its behalf.

Yes. I think some property can also be added to posts to simplify discovery e.g. Note.contextObserver.

However, it has the same technical hurdle — lack of existing implementation — than the alternative, which is to multi-type the collection into ["OrderedCollection", "Service"] or similar.

So ["OrderedCollection", "Service"] is supposed to be an actor that is also a dynamic container? That doesn't make any sense, and I don't know to implement that in C2S setting. It also conflicts with FEP-fe34 and FEP-2277.

@feralthoughts

I feel restricting all replies to OP's privacy level will prevent many possible pathologies.

But it introduces a new pathology: people who use platforms not supporting conversation containers may be not aware of the fact that their comment visibility setting will be ignored. They reply with a DM, but conversation owner forces it to be public.

So I think narrowing should be allowed.

I am not sure about the OP. Maybe OP should never be excluded.

Either way, in future, do you plan to apply conversation containers to public conversations?

Yes.