@julian You can certainly use the intent buttons on Bandwagon and the Qwertylicious demo site. They're actually two different implementations, so it might be valid to try both of them.
I'm pretty sure that @pfefferle has implemented some buttons in the WordPress plugin - Matthias, do you have a demo site we can test with?
And, I know Mastodon's Activity Intent work has landed, but I'm not familiar enough with their buttons to say which is being powered by Activity Intents, or how.
@julian I can do that. Both terms *are* in the Activity Vocabulary, so we're well within the spec to include them here. But yeah, it would be good to include a note that points to the FEPs where they're really defined.
That makes sense. Iâve been building out contexts for conversations, so itâs top of mind for me. But it makes sense that audience and inReplyTo might be enough. If the context is missing, Iâd probably just fill in the context from the parent anyway.
@julian This is fantastic. You're awesome, Julian!
I'll try to take a look at this tonight/tomorrow.
Once you're at a stopping point, would it be possible for you to list out the intents you publish and receive? I'd love to include that in the Implementations section at the bottom of the document.
I know.. agreement on the Fediverse is so rare, itâs almost scary đ
Yeah, Undo sounds like it makes sense in your case. I didnât think of any in the beginning, so just overlooked it.
One complicating factor is in showing the âstateâ of things in the remote site - weâd need a way to know that you voted for something first, so then we could undo it.
But yeah, letâs add that into 3b86 as well. What kinds of parameters would you want to pass? Or, would you just want to write a PR?
Youâre exactly right, and I donât see it as a criticism at all. Itâs an on-ramp that lets people explore slowly, then add capabilities gradually. Itâs a checked-and-egg problem.
I also want a âreplyâ activity as well, but Iâm afraid nobody would support it yet.
So I look for {inReplyTo} in the create response to see if replies are possible, then register a âsyntheticâ activity for the application to discover. This lets me turn buttons on and off based on your servers abilities.
It looks beautiful! Well done! I can't wait to try it out, as soon as you have it live :)
And, I'd love to hear how it goes - if there are things we can make easier, document better, whatever. I still need to make an implementation guide, but just haven't been able to get it to the top of my stack.
@julian
I believe there was a questionably named âWebFistâ protocol that allowed cross-server WebFinger.
https://indieweb.org/Webfist
@julian You can certainly use the intent buttons on Bandwagon and the Qwertylicious demo site. They're actually two different implementations, so it might be valid to try both of them.
I'm pretty sure that @pfefferle has implemented some buttons in the WordPress plugin - Matthias, do you have a demo site we can test with?
And, I know Mastodon's Activity Intent work has landed, but I'm not familiar enough with their buttons to say which is being powered by Activity Intents, or how.
@julian I can do that. Both terms *are* in the Activity Vocabulary, so we're well within the spec to include them here. But yeah, it would be good to include a note that points to the FEPs where they're really defined.
Ok. More to do... đ
@julian
That makes sense. Iâve been building out contexts for conversations, so itâs top of mind for me. But it makes sense that audience and inReplyTo might be enough. If the context is missing, Iâd probably just fill in the context from the parent anyway.
@julian I'm writing this up now. Do you also use the {context} property? Should I include this as well?
@julian This is fantastic. You're awesome, Julian!
I'll try to take a look at this tonight/tomorrow.
Once you're at a stopping point, would it be possible for you to list out the intents you publish and receive? I'd love to include that in the Implementations section at the bottom of the document.
@julian
I know.. agreement on the Fediverse is so rare, itâs almost scary đ
Yeah, Undo sounds like it makes sense in your case. I didnât think of any in the beginning, so just overlooked it.
One complicating factor is in showing the âstateâ of things in the remote site - weâd need a way to know that you voted for something first, so then we could undo it.
But yeah, letâs add that into 3b86 as well. What kinds of parameters would you want to pass? Or, would you just want to write a PR?
@julian
Youâre exactly right, and I donât see it as a criticism at all. Itâs an on-ramp that lets people explore slowly, then add capabilities gradually. Itâs a checked-and-egg problem.
I also want a âreplyâ activity as well, but Iâm afraid nobody would support it yet.
So I look for {inReplyTo} in the create response to see if replies are possible, then register a âsyntheticâ activity for the application to discover. This lets me turn buttons on and off based on your servers abilities.
@julian @pfefferle
It looks beautiful! Well done! I can't wait to try it out, as soon as you have it live :)
And, I'd love to hear how it goes - if there are things we can make easier, document better, whatever. I still need to make an implementation guide, but just haven't been able to get it to the top of my stack.
One thing I've been focused on recently is including a signup link in the workflow to help brand new people. Here's a silly demo of my latest: https://qwertylicious.dev/have-you-heard-of-qwertylicious
@julian
Also, how far along are you? If youâd like, youâre welcome to use, fork, or be inspired by my JS library - https://github.com/EmissarySocial/camperjs
I still need to do some better documentation for it, but let me know if youâre interested and Iâll get writing today.