silverpill@mitra.social I thought the plural of Emoji was Emoji

jdt@enigmatick.social could it be a mistake in the reply? For example, if the reply had all of the mentions removed I would think Mastodon would send out an object with empty to and cc.

douginamug@mastodon.xyz this entire series right here https://seb.jambor.dev/posts/understanding-activitypub/

benpate@mastodon.social Emissary interested? Har Har Har

dfyx@social.helios42.de because followers and outbox collections can be faked.

silverpill@mitra.social I wasn't aware that there were sections pertaining to context. I'll have to review more closely.

jsit@social.coop Ghost? NodeBB? Just to name a couple

box464@mastodon.social we're thrilled to have been funded for another round! There's a lot we want to accomplish and we'll be working on our milestone list in the coming weeks. Context discovery is just one exciting thing we have planned!

@pfefferle @julian @bengo @csarven @raucao @oblomov i think the context is this github issue: https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/320was put to the swicg mailing list as a cfc by evan: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swicg/2025Jun/0038.htmlbengo requested a clear "error description" and "candidate correction": https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swicg/2025Jun/0039.htmlto clarify, no requirements are being removed: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swicg/2025Jun/0043.htmli agree that cfc emails should include an "error description" and "candidate correction". perhaps https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/320#issuecomment-2971191447 suffices?

renchap@oisaur.com edent@mastodon.social as it should, as the followers collection can be gamed and should not be trusted.

silverpill@mitra.social nice job! Congratulations on the release now you must maintain it for free forever.

rwg@aoir.social I'm not actually sure! You'll have to ask reiver@mastodon.social about that one. Let me know too!

julian@community.nodebb.org Yeah, being able to treat Mastodon and Lemmy/mbin/piefed like a bulletin board continues to feel like magic.

לאצי the usernames work fine locally (that is, on the site itself). It's when interoperating with other sites not running NodeBB where there are issues, it seems

Is there or should there be a distinction between the original and the mirrors? We have a conversation owner at the thread level (which is either the forum, subforum, forum category, or person who created the top level post, depending on the software). They determine the official moderated version of the thread since they can remove comments (although mirrors don't have to honor that). If we show that conversation on another server, technically that is a mirror of that thread, especially if you are throwing it in a category or displaying it under a hashtag. Should we be indicating that a particular thread was started on a particular forum (or category within a forum)? Should we be honoring the moderated version of the conversation from the original thread? The concept of mirroring threads across platforms is great for participation and censorship resistance, but it does make it unclear about who owns the thread from a moderation perspective.

trwnh@mastodon.social before, I was not sending Accept at all, now I am sending application/jrd+json. FWIW testing with cURL showed the same Bad Request with application/json.

Hey rimu@piefed.social thanks for responding (and sorry for the late reply!) I am not married to the Announce([Article|Note|Page]) approach, so I am definitely open to Create([Article|Note|Page]) with a back-reference. I think I went the former direction because there is a known fallback mechanism — the Announce is treated as a share/boost/repost as normal. However, sending the Create also is fine I think. However, do we need a backreference? In my limited research, it seems that Piefed, et al. picks the first Group actor and associates the post with that community. If I sent over a Create(Article) with two Group actors addressed, could Piefed associate the post with the first, and initiate a cross-post with the remaining Group actors? Secondly, is how to handle sync. 1b12 relies on communities having reciprocal followers in order for two-way synchronization to be established. On my end since I know it is cross-posted I will now send 1b12 activities to cross-posted communities, but can Piefed, et al. send 1b12 activities back as well, in the absence of followers? cc andrew_s@piefed.social nutomic@lemmy.ml melroy@kbin.melroy.org bentigorlich@gehirneimer.de

@obenland@mastodon.social wonderful, good work!

@pfefferle@mastodon.social just wanted to poke you about this issue again. The latest updates to NodeBB now do a webfinger backcheck to ensure that the actor has a valid webfinger entry for their purported handle. If it does not, then the user is not properly created. Mastodon also does this. This check is probably for security as well as for preventing handle collisions. The multilingual plugin in conjunction with the ActivityPub plugin creates users that share the same handle, and that causes issues with federated content. For example, this article by @jonvt@vivaldi.com will load up just fine in Mastodon, but this japanese article by @akira@vivaldi.com will not, because that second article's attributedTo is https://vivaldi.com/ja/?author=176, which fails that check (the author's ID is actually https://vivaldi.com?author=176 as per the handle backcheck) cc @AltCode

@AltCode One significant potential issues with listing all followed categories in the same kind of layout as /categories is the below-the-fold effect, or the page-2 effect as one might have called it in earlier times. Whatever categories end up falling below a certain scroll distance will just never been seen by most users. If you follow a lot of categories, the ones that end up closer to the bottom of the list than the top will just end up ignored. It doesn't encourage participation, and it also doesn't discourage following a lot of categories that you don't actually care about. And follow relationships are very important under ActivityPub, since they dictate content flow. Bringing in a lot of remote content that no one on the local forum is actually reading or engaging with is very wasteful. An easily accessible compact list might be better, with different sorting options so that users can choose to have categories with new content float to the top. Usually with forum categories, you want the ordering to be static, but that expectation won't necessarily be there for just a list.