Re: ActivityPump API

On 9/20/12 4:57 PM, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> Melvin,
>
> Good question.
>
> Only the user "bwk" can post to his own outbox. So the actor is implied.
>
> You can post with the actor set, like so:
> |{
>      "actor": {
>          "id":"acct:bwk@coding.example",
>          "objectType": "person"
>      },
>      "verb": "follow",
>      "object": {
>          "id":"acct:ken@coding.example",
>          "objectType": "person"
>      }
> }|
> ...and it will be checked for validity. If you post with the wrong 
> actor, you get an error.
>
> -Evan

Evan,

How is user 'bwk' identified by the system in question? What about a 
shared outbox? What happens when 'bwk' seeks to temporarily or 
permanently delegate privileges to others etc?

Kingsley
>
> On 12-09-20 07:17 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 20 September 2012 12:58, Evan Prodromou <evan@status.net 
>> <mailto:evan@status.net>> wrote:
>>
>>     I thought people on this list might find the new API document I
>>     wrote for the ActivityPump interesting:
>>
>>     https://github.com/evanp/activitypump/blob/master/API.md
>>
>>     It's a simple (/I/ think) API that follows the patterns of Atom
>>     Publishing Protocol but uses Activity Streams JSON as a feed and
>>     entry format. (It's based on work I did on StatusNet, which has a
>>     similar API based on the Activity Streams Atom serialization.)
>>
>>     tl;dr version: each user has two primary streams (represented as
>>     Activity Streams multi-page collections): an /outbox/ that
>>     contains activities they've done, and an /inbox/ that contains
>>     the activities of people they follow. To make something happen,
>>     you POST an activity to the outbox.
>>
>>     One side-benefit is that the inbox makes a nice endpoint for
>>     delivery of activities from remote servers. This serves the same
>>     purpose as PubSubHubbub and Salmon in the OStatus stack -- but
>>     considerably easier, I think. It requires Dialback
>>     authentication, however, which is a) easy but b) only a few weeks
>>     old.
>>
>>     I'd love any feedback here or as a github issue. There are plenty
>>     of test cases in the ActivityPump repository.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for sharing.
>>
>> I like the idea of POSTing to a a URI and it's something we're doing 
>> more and more with the Pingback Protocol [1]
>>
>> With pingback we have started with a simple message system that has 3 
>> fields
>>
>> 1. to
>> 2. from
>> 3. message
>>
>> But is extensible to almost any type messaging.
>>
>> A question about the body:
>>
>> |{
>>      "verb": "follow",
>>      "object": {
>>          "id":"acct:ken@coding.example",
>>          "objectType": "person"
>>      }
>> }
>> |
>> The verb is a follow of ken, but it doesnt say who is doing the 
>> following.  Would it not be more elegant to provide both the follower 
>> and who is being followed, in the message.  In this way you have a 
>> low coupling with transport mechanisms.
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/community/rww/wiki/Pingback
>>
>>
>>     -Evan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Evan Prodromou, CEO and Founder, StatusNet Inc.
> 1124 rue Marie-Anne Est #32, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H2J 2B7
> E:evan@status.net  P: +1-514-554-3826


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen