Skip to content

Unicode in handles

ActivityPub
15 6 139

Diese Artikel könnten Dich auch interessieren.

  • 0 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    28 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    smallcircles@social.coop if you're not able to consume dev discussions on the fediverse and have to continually rely on people creating content on your platform then you need to raise that as an issue on your platform software.
  • Here's an idea.

    Uncategorized activitypub
    7
    0 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    benpate@mastodon.social Emissary interested? Har Har Har
  • 0 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    silverpill@mitra.social I wasn't aware that there were sections pertaining to context. I'll have to review more closely.
  • 0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    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!
  • 0 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    72 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    I suppose you're right in a way. The context owner is not supposed to be set by someone other than the context owner. It's a fallback mechanism intended for better compatibility with Mastodon. When a group is addressed and it is one of the local NodeBB categories, it will assume control If it is another group that it knows about but isn't same origin to the author, then no category is assumed.
  • Just for fun...

    Uncategorized activitypub
    4
    0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    steve@social.technoetic.com only 19/20, I am disappoint. [image: 1752346993311-1000010307.png]
  • 0 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    162 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    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
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    86 Aufrufe
    FrankMF
    Kommt echt an Ich bin verblüfft LOL