49
New Social Web Working Group at W3C (socialwebfoundation.org)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/fediverse@lemmy.world
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 9 months ago* (3 children)

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 but that requires some work

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    What is this proprietary layer you speak of?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months 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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent