Does #Mastodon implement #ActivityPub client-server API?
I do what https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#client-to-server-interactions tells me to:
- I look up my own Actor object and look up its outbox (qoto.org/users/robryk/outbox in my case),
- I send a POST with appropriate 'Authorization: Bearer ...' header,
and then I get 404 (GETs on that URL do succeed and show a collection).
Is client-server activitypub something that is ~ever implemented?
@robryk For reasons I don’t know, it has its entirely separate API for clients. And everybody else adopted the same API for some reason. Not sure if anyone uses the client API of ActivityPub?
@robryk But in general, what I have seen from the ActivityPub spec… it’s not great. Reads more like someone wrote a quick brain dump rather than an actual spec.
@js Frankly, I prefer the client-server ActivityPub API. It does leave media handling to be defined by implementers, which is not great, but I'd prefer if people implemented c-s ActivityPub and server-specific media handling over everything being server specific.
Specific reasons why I like it more is that ActivityPub allows one to express things that cannot be expressed in MastodonAPI for silly arbitrary reasons (for example, boosts with non-public targets; Mastodon claims that it has per-post privacy model, but boosts belie that: they all share their privacy settings with ~the profile).
@robryk I'm not arguing against it, just saying the spec doesn't read too well :(
@robryk The whole spec reads a little bit too much to me as if someone just quickly wrote something down, rather than a formal spec.