Re: Implementing Federation, Part I

Noted. We will reserve discussion time for this in our next meeting.

James


On Monday, 18 December 2023 at 22:14, Evan Prodromou <evan@prodromou.name> wrote:


> Marcus, this is a really helpful blog post.
> 

> As a community group at the W3C, we can publish Reports:
> 

> https://www.w3.org/community/reports/reqs/
> 

> Reports are the closest thing to “official” documentation from the CG. We can use them for new specifications, or for documenting existing practices. Or, really, for anything (processes, overviews, research, whatever).
> 

> I think there are two areas of documentation that we could provide really helpful guidance to implementers with:
> 

> -   ActivityPub and WebFinger. How to look up an ActivityPub actor with a WebFinger ID. How to generate a WebFinger ID for an ActivityPub actor.
> -   ActivityPub and HTTP Signatures: Which HTTP Signature version we use. How to make a signed request. How to verify a signed request.
> 

> 

> Making these reports doesn’t commit the CG or ActivityPub to these other standards forever. But it would help implementers today make software that’s compatible with the rest of the fediverse. It would also provide a starting point for improvement.
> 

> This isn’t everything that’s needed beyond AP to make a fediverse server, but it would be a big step forward.
> 

> Chairs: I’d like to put this topic on the agenda for the next CG meeting.
> 

> Marcus: would you consider editing one of these Reports, if the group decides to go ahead with this idea?
> 

> Evan
> 

> On 2023-12-16 2:52 p.m., Marcus Rohrmoser wrote:
> 

> > Yesterday I wrote a small piece about what I learned about activitypub federation so far.
> > 

> > https://blog.mro.name/2023/12/implementing-federation-i/
> > 

> > Comments welcome.
> > 

> > /Marcus
> > 

> > P.S.: @Evan: cc-ing you again to evtl. investigate delivery.