Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout
Note Detail
Reply to @Profpatsch@mastodon.xyz
silverpill@silverpill@mitra.social (2026-06-07 00:14:39)
@Profpatsch @sabrinkmann @grindhold type is not completely useless, it's just an equivalent of a boolean property, for example type: Proposal is another way of saying isProposal: true.
Sometimes types are handy - I don't apply duck typing to activities.
---Reply---
Samuel Brinkmann@sabrinkmann@hachyderm.io (2026-06-13 03:08:13)
@silverpill @Profpatsch @grindhold
I think content negotiations would be interesting as soon as we start using different content types more frequently. For example, with software that has menus, I guess it would be interesting to have a note version, an event version and just a proposal version for each item.
Conversely, if you needed to buy a ticket for an event, it would also be interesting to receive a proposal for that.
Reply
---Replies---
silverpill@silverpill@mitra.social (2026-06-13 04:30:14)
@sabrinkmann Why create different versions when you can use one?
There are ways in which the Fediverse can accomodate the greater number of different services:
- Content negotiation: every server advertises supported types, and the sender needs to adjust activities depending on what the recipient understands.
- Duck typing: recipients don't filter received objects by type, and instead look at their properties.
I don't think the first approach can work at scale. It's like serving different websites to different web browsers.
(Negotiation can be useful in some cases, though - I even wrote a FEP about this: https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/fep/844e/fep-844e.md)
@Profpatsch @grindhold