!Friendica Support If I quote-share a post coming from #Tumblr or #Diaspora on Friendica, I learnt that some platforms (Mastodon, Misskey, ...) aren't able to display this as expected. In Friendica, I see a preview image of the post, which is what I would expect:
Looking at this from Mastodon, it looks slightly less usable but at least there's still something:
On Misskey, as has been reported (can't reproduce as I don't have or want an account there), it seems the post is empty.
Hubzilla is where it looks best:
This is kind of a mess. It seems similar for Diaspoar posts. What can be done, or who's responsible to handle that right, from a standards perspective? Is there any way to be reasonably sure posts look at least usable on all federated platforms?
Cătă
in reply to Kristian • • •@Kristian @Aljoscha Rittner (beandev) I guess it is up to each platform how it displays various posts, maybe.
As a side-note, in Friendica I saw that gif previews were actually played - something I never saw anywhere.
Michael Vogel
in reply to Kristian • • •Kristian
in reply to Michael Vogel • • •@Michael Vogel @Cătă Thanks both. So I guess it's on the "other" platforms to fix that in a way, then? Not so nice. We've been discussing this out here earlier, was kind of hoping something could be fixed on the sender end of this. But seems not the case. 😔
@Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
alm10965 ┐( ˘_˘)┌
in reply to Kristian • • •Mathias Hellquist (Friendica)
in reply to alm10965 ┐( ˘_˘)┌ • • •@A.l.win M.üller ~ alm 🛠️
Blink twice if we should call for help
@Kristian @Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
utzer [Friendica]
in reply to Mathias Hellquist (Friendica) • • •Rebeka Catalina
in reply to Kristian • •@Kristian
I remember that a couple of years ago Hypolite had the idea of a target detection module/layer/YouNameIt for friendica. So something that modifies friendica posts for specific targets (like mastodon) if needed, so that posts appear more in the intended way.
Basically I thought this is a good idea, but in the end they decided to not develop such for friendica.
Kristian likes this.
Friendica Support reshared this.
Kristian
in reply to Rebeka Catalina • • •Friendica Support reshared this.
Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
in reply to Kristian • • •Yes the PreviewCard is a special Mastodon feature and not a part of the ActivityPub protocol.
Here some details:
https://box464.com/posts/mastodon-preview-cards/#the-details
@c47
Understanding Mastodon Preview Card Display Logic
Jeff SikesRebeka Catalina likes this.
Friendica Support reshared this.
Kristian
in reply to Aljoscha Rittner (beandev) • • •@Rebeka Catalina
Friendica Support reshared this.
Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
in reply to Kristian • • •Even if Friendica were to do that, it would be a specific API function that is also not offered via ActivityPub. Every client should know that Friendica now offers this via its API. But this is only possible in a direct reading relationship. So Mastodon instance to Friendica instance and client to Friendica instance. A hop in between and the preview would be gone.
Actually, only ActivityPub can be the right solution.
@c47
Friendica Support reshared this.
Kristian
in reply to Aljoscha Rittner (beandev) • • •@Rebeka Catalina
Friendica Support reshared this.
Rebeka Catalina
in reply to Kristian • •@Kristian @Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
But... standards are often a question of interpretation and often people just do things they think it's the way. In the end it's all just a matter of "do we want play together in one way or another or not?" and is "we" all parties or just one? 
AFAIK mastodon was the first "who" developed it's own AP-dialect that time
XKCD
Aljoscha Rittner (beandev) likes this.
Friendica Support reshared this.
Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
in reply to Rebeka Catalina • • •🤣
@z428
Rebeka Catalina likes this.
Friendica Support reshared this.
Kristian
in reply to Rebeka Catalina • • •@Rebeka Catalina Yeah, XKCD 927 nails it once again.😶 From my perspective, however, it's about questioning the understanding of the word "standard" once more. Especially in terms of "standards" as something that support extensibility, dialects, ... . In a way, this "just" feels like "we do want a standard but actually we don't want to be restricted by it", which eliminates much of the reasons why to have standards. I'm pretty much siding with what the Diaspora guy wrote a while ago: Shouldn't a "standard" be all about a spec which I could use to implement my stuff without having to bother how others implement theirs, knowing the standard describes how things behave reasonably formal? Otherwise, it will boil down to the dreaded XMPP problem again: With too many servers, clients, ..., the subset of what could _reliably_ be used in all environments is unencrypted plain text messages without any media attached, and given the nature of (and many of the disagreements in) the open community, chances to have an agreement on "wanting to play together meaningfully" are so little that in the end, this minimum subset won't very much change anytime soon. So, too, in this case expectation probably is that this will remain "broken" ... for an indefinite amount of time. 🙈
@Aljoscha Rittner (beandev)
like this
Rebeka Catalina and utzer [Friendica] like this.
Friendica Support reshared this.
utzer [Friendica]
in reply to Rebeka Catalina • • •Friendica Support reshared this.
utzer [Friendica]
in reply to Kristian • • •Kristian likes this.
Friendica Support reshared this.
eshep
in reply to Kristian • • •Friendica Support reshared this.