Conversation

Notices

1. Christine Lemmer-Webber (cwebber@octodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 03-Sep-2017 19:39:13 UTC Christine Lemmer-Webber

   • Eugen 🎄
   • 🦊 Åldα ☭🏴🏳️‍🌈
   • Sylvhem

   @gargron @Alda @Sylvhem OStatus didn't become an official W3C standard, though it did have a community group around it at one point.

   • Hallå Kitteh repeated this.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Sunday, 03-Sep-2017 20:15:36 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     • Eugen 🎄
     • 🦊 Åldα ☭🏴🏳️‍🌈
     • Sylvhem
     @gargron @alda @sylvhem @cwebber Except it uses the 2010 draft of WebFinger, not the final spec. :-)
   • Mike Macgirvin (mike@macgirvin.com)'s status on Sunday, 03-Sep-2017 20:28:08 UTC Mike Macgirvin

     • Eugen 🎄
     @Gargron @cwebber - the only thing with an actual RFC behind it when OStatus was born was atom. Salmon, webfinger, pubsubhubbub and activitystreams were all "proposals" of some type; and those that have since been standardised have done so in a radically different form (ActivityStreams and Webfinger were both standardised as json and only vaguely resemble the old XML specs). What made these things "standard" for OStatus was apparently the fact that they were proposed at one time for the OpenSocial initiative and many were in use at Google (which dropped all of them when G+ was born).
     Hallå Kitteh repeated this.