Re: Meta Unspools Threads

pá 14. 7. 2023 v 20:31 odesílatel Johannes Ernst <johannes.ernst@gmail.com>
napsal:

> Hi Ben,
>
> Appreciate the responses. I missed an important question: what’s going to
> be in your webfinger and in your @context?
>
> Their variety is very large in real-world Fediverse implementations, see a
> collection here: https://fedidevs.org/reference/actor/ and
> https://fedidevs.org/reference/webfinger/
>
> Are you going to mostly follow Mastodon’s exceptionally large @context
> section, or make it as clean/brief/standard as possible? Will there be any
> new elements introduced by Meta?
>
> Related: consider contributing to (help fund?) a Fediverse test suite that
> we could all run against our respective apps. It would benefit the entire
> Fediverse including Meta/Threads. Nothing as frustrating as attempting to
> debug customer-reported interop problems on a truly decentralized
> (development, operation) network.
>
> Best,
>
>
>
>
> Johannes.
>
>
> Johannes Ernst
>
> Fediforum <https://fediforum.org/>
> Dazzle <https://dazzle.town/>
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 13, 2023, at 19:30, Ben Savage <btsavage@meta.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Johannes,
>
> Thank you for the welcome, and for these questions:
>
> > I think one of the things we are all very interested in learning is just
> what exact stack of protocols Meta is implementing, and then the
> higher-level policies not prescribed in the standard. As we all know,
> merely implementing ActivityPub in itself is not sufficient to produce
> interoperable software nor make what’s happening comprehensible to users.
>
> The Threads team is hard at work on a bunch of different features
> requested by the community, so it’s difficult to estimate when support for
> ActivityPub will ship. That said, a fair bit of progress has been made on
> this front, so I can share with you all our current thinking about some of
> these things. Again, it’s possible things could change between now and when
> it ships, but this is at least a snapshot of our current plan:
>
>
>    - Identifier format: @user@threads.net
>    - Webfinger: Yes. This would be the first step when someone asks to
>    follow a fully-qualified identifier from another instance
>    - HTTP Signatures: Current plan is to implement HTTP Signatures and
>    not LD signatures. This is what mastodon uses when secure mode is turned on.
>    - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cavage-http-signatures
>       - https://docs.joinmastodon.org/spec/security/#http
>       - Which of the activity types: Most of the core formats, still
>    scoping out the feasibility of all of them.
>    - Mastodon doesn’t support quote posts (yet, it’s coming), so we’d
>       like to discuss how to model those when we send them outbound.
>       - Rich text or not?: No current plans for rich text
>    - Hyperlinks?: Yes
>    - HTML Markup?: No plans for this right now
>
>
Good plan!

Some caution around the right version of HTTP Signatures to ensure maximum
compatibility


>
>    -
>
>
> —Ben
>
> On 12 Jul 2023, at 1:04 AM, Johannes Ernst <johannes.ernst@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 
> This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
> You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
> Welcome from me, too!
>
> It’s great to see participation from Meta here, because bona fide
> participation in the relevant standards community can help alleviate many
> potential concerns that the community has about Meta’s role in the
> Fediverse, as I’m sure you are very aware. So this is good. To echo your
> comment, I’m looking forward to working together as well.
>
> út 11. 7. 2023 v 4:53 odesílatel Ben Savage <btsavage@meta.com> napsal:
>
>> I'm a newb to the ActivityPub standard, but I'm excited to start
>> attending the group's meetings, learning more, and hopefully contributing
>> back to the community.
>>
>> I'm really excited that Meta plans to implement the ActivityPub standard,
>> and federate with other instances. I'm really interested to see how this
>> interoperable future plays out!
>>
>
> I think one of the things we are all very interested in learning is just
> what exact stack of protocols Meta is implementing, and then the
> higher-level policies not prescribed in the standard. As we all know,
> merely implementing ActivityPub in itself is not sufficient to produce
> interoperable software nor make what’s happening comprehensible to users.
>
> For example …
> * Identifier format? @user@threads.net probably? Will there also be HTTP
> aliases?
> * Webfinger? Probably?
> * HTTP Signatures with … what signature types?
> * Which of the activity types?
> * Rich text or not? Hyperlinks? HTML markup?
> … and so on.
>
> And of course if the people writing the code at Meta think that they need
> to deviate from the standard, or augment it, to meet some kind of
> requirement that you are encountering, we’d love to hear that at the
> earliest opportunity so we can keep network talk the same, standardized
> protocol.
>
> Again welcome, and cheers,
>
>
>
>
> Johannes.
>
> Johannes Ernst
>
> Fediforum <https://fediforum.org/>
> Dazzle <https://dazzle.town/>
>
>
>