Re: Towards a Unified Open Social Web Spec

On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 at 16:30, Cristiano Longo <
cristianolongo@opendatahacklab.org> wrote:

> More precisely, it is a strict subset of JSON-LD.
>
> "The serialized JSON form of an Activity Streams 2.0 document MUST be
> consistent with what would be produced by the standard JSON-LD 1.0
> Processing Algorithms and API [JSON-LD-API] Compaction Algorithm using,
> at least, the normative JSON-LD @context definition provided here."
>
cfr. https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/#jsonld


>
> On 28/08/24 15:24, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> > How so?
>

AFAICT Not everyone follows the
`https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams` @context
JSON-LD definition to the letter adding and making variant object types.

My idea is that that "extra" compliant "interop" servers may also augment
the activitystreams spec with the source or destination agents extensions
and deviations based on the agents id or its domain thus determining its id.

It would be nice to have a webfinger agent id field and maybe an augmented
context field variant agents could give, falling back to the determinism of
the id then the domain augmented by a common repositioryt of deviant agent
extensions and deviations.

Kind regards,

Aaron


> > Evan
> >
> > On 2024-08-28 2:38 a.m., Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> >> However, ActivityPub did diverge slightly from the JSON-LD standard
> >> in the end, which complicates interop.
> >
>
>

-- 
Aaron Gray - @AaronNGray@fosstodon.org | @aaronngray@threads.net

Independent Open Source Software Engineer, Computer Language Researcher,
Information Theorist, Amataur Computer Scientist and Environmentalist and
Climate Science Disseminator.