Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout

Note Detail

Reply to @silverpill@mitra.social
marius@mariusor@metalhead.club (2026-06-14 22:18:50)
@silverpill wrong about thinking that the activity type is the only meaningful information about the side-effect of its reception. 

The official specification already has a case where Create/Delete have slightly different logic based on their objects:

https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#h-motivations-crud

vs. 

https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#h-motivations-relationships

PS. I'm not defending the Mastodon FEP, but clarifying that the underlying assumption of using existing vocabulary for what is basically the same operation, be it on different object types, makes sense.

---Reply---
silverpill@silverpill@mitra.social (2026-06-14 22:28:58)
@mariusor Activity type is not the only meaningful information about the side-effect, but in many cases a custom type could help with the identification.
Reply 
---Replies---
silverpill@silverpill@mitra.social (2026-06-14 22:39:14)
@mariusor What kind of side-effect hint would you prefer?

1.  Specialized activity name

{
  "type": "AcceptFeatureRequest"
  "object": "https://social.example/request"
}

2.  Additional property

{
  "type": "Accept",
  "object": "https://social.example/request",
  "objectType": "FeatureRequest"
}

3.  Embedded object (possibly partial):

{
  "type": "Accept",
  "object": {
    "id": "https://social.example/request",
    "type": "FeatureRequest"
  }
}