Is it weird that some #ActivityPub implementations don't seem to comply with the standard as thoroughly as others? E.g., #Friendica's outboxes return no "Create" activities, listing posts directly instead. #Funkwhale returns Activity Streams objects only on GET requests with "accept" set to 'application/activity+json', but the header which is mandatory to support is 'application/ld+json; profile="https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams"'. Also, no implementation treats likes as discussed in the docs. #Fediverse
ActivityStreams 2.0 Terms
This document lists the terms used for the ActivityStreams 2.0 protocol and its stable extensions, and provides a namespace so each term has an HTTP IRI.www.w3.org
Hypolite Petovan
•Jun Bird
•Hypolite Petovan likes this.
Hypolite Petovan
•Jun Bird
•I mean, wouldn't it be better follow it closely to be safe? Also, does that mean that Mastodon is the de-facto standard?
Hypolite Petovan
•On the other hand, it is easy to test your implementation against Mastodon’s because you can see wether posts, comments and likes are federating back and forth. Since Mastodon is the most popular ActivityPub implementation, it became the de facto reference implementation.