Federated SocialHub Categories
SocialHub admins can federate categories, making categories accessible in the fediverse. This is an overview of current ActivityPub actors that you can follow and participate in from the Fediverse.
|SocialHub Category | ActivityPub Actor @socialhub.activitypub.rocks | Settings||--- | --- | ---||#activitypub | @protocol@socialhub.activitypub.rocks | Full topic as Notes||#activitypub:s2s | @proto-s2s@socialhub.activitypub.rocks | Full topic as Notes||#activitypub:c2s | @proto-c2s@socialhub.activitypub.rocks | Full topic as Notes||#standards:fep | @feps@socialhub.activitypub.rocks | Full topic as Notes||#community | @community@socialhub.activitypub.rocks | Full topic as Notes||#fediversity | @fediversity@socialhub.activitypub.rocks | Full topic as Notes|
You may find federation information in each federated category on the tools line:
Please reply to this topic:
- to request more ActivityPub actors
- to correct something in the above table
- to report on your experience using these actors
Making categories accessible in the fediverse
Continuing the discussion from SocialCG should consult SocialHub before appropriating tasks: I’m a bit behind on how AP federation works between forums, so I’m not sure what this means.SocialHub
Angus McLeod
in reply to hellekin • • •Apologies for being absent here, I've had to focus on other work.
There's a few two many messages and issues for me to parse all in one go. @how could you help me focus on the most pressing issues on this community wrt to the ActivityPub plugin? What is at the top of the list do you think?
hellekin
in reply to Angus McLeod • • •Hi @angus, nice to read you here.
I would say @bengo's complaint about copy-pasting the actor's URL might come first, since it would allow people outside Discourse connecting from a usable URL. Right now the URL is simply the one of the federated category (or else), but when pasted within Mastodon, for example, it does not show up anything useful.
Another minor annoyance I found is that remote likes are not "documented": missing icon, no useful name nor link.
Those are from the top of my head. I'm sure others may have stronger opinions on the interop level that I did not take the time to observe properly. How's the group interop going?
silverpill
in reply to hellekin • • •@angus What has been said about actor URLs also applies to post URLs.
For example the top-level post here has ID
https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/ap/object/7db3a82e730dac6957cfca7da9ac5f0b, but if you open it in the browser (withAccept: text/html) the server responds with "Bad Request". The expected response is a HTML representation of the post.And the reverse: when requesting
https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/federated-socialhub-categories/4648/1withAccept:, the server responds with406 Not Acceptableinstead of returning an AP representation of the post.Angus McLeod
in reply to silverpill • • •This is something I'll be looking to work on after this big PR is merged.
github.com/discourse/discourse…
Albeit, I would note that this kind of behaviour, i.e. automatic AP-to-Platform URI conversion, is (as far as I'm aware) not part of the ActivityPub spec. In my head it's more of a nice-to-have feature that ActivityPub power-users have gotten used to. In general I'm a little wary of focusing on things that fit into that category. The overall sustainability of the Discourse AP plugin will, in the end, be determined by broader adoption. But, nevertheless, I am going to implement this soon.
Discourse to discourse verification by angusmcleod · Pull Request #133 · discourse/discourse-activity-pub
GitHubsilverpill
in reply to hellekin • • •angus:
Yes, but what authentication flow does it use? My verification fails at
/oauth/tokencall.---
On the topic of federated categories -- the problem with duplicated comments from other Fediverse servers persists: socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/…
WordPress follow failure
SocialHub