@cwebber I made these diagrams, can you please tell me if my understanding is correct?
@tomas there would be confusion, see XMPP clients... we need very different platforms (blogging, microblogging, newspapers, video and audio streaming, issue tracking, collaborative editing, ) each one with its own user experience but federating "actions" and "objects".
For example I could use even a Mastodon client to reply to comments in a issue on GitLab but I would still need a native GitLab client to perform actions like pull request or fork.
@tomas I disagree, it's not a matter of just branding, but having different platforms with different features for different people. If an actor is on another platform expect less interactions with one using the same platform or login in the other platform with the same account and enjoy it.
XMPP approach was proven wrong and in fact anything else follow it so I don't know what you are referring to...
I'm not an expert but my understanding is:
XMPP: trying to define spec per-feature, hope people implement XMPP servers and clients, assuming the user knows each client and each server which feature/spec support.
ActivityPub: federating everything that involves actions, actors and objects, defining how communications happen and provide some example of actions etc for common use cases.
Every platform can implement AP because is very abstract, see Mastodon.
@mmn XMPP totally failed, it was OK for very basic single chat ten years ago. Now clients for Android, desktop and Web implement different sets of features.
With XMPP I can't say to someone "register to platform.com and download a client for your device". Instead Mastodon IS a platform and it has ITS OWN clients that offers consistent UX.
XMPP can't be abstract as AP because they are protocols for totally different things. Matrix replaces XMPP.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!