Jupiter Rowland@silverpill Would be interesting to add Hubzilla's Zot6 and (streams)' Nomad (which would be Zot12 if it wasn't incompatible with Zot6) to the list.
By the way: Forte doesn't require a gateway to communicate with non-nomadic ActivityPub. A fully cloned Forte channel can communicate with a Mastodon account without jumping through hoops. Remember that Forte has almost fully-featured Hubzilla-level nomadic identity (i.e. everything except real-time syncing between channel instances; unlike Hubzilla and (streams) which do sync in real time, it needs a cronjob for that) directly built into its core.
(streams) does support nomadic identity via ActivityPub. But internally, it uses and relies upon Nomad for its nomadic identity. It only supports nomadic identity via ActivityPub a) because it was used as a development platform for just this and b) in order to be able to understand cloned nomadic ActivityPub actors elsewhere. This is also why it isn't possible to move from (streams) to Forte, to move from Forte to (streams) or to clone between (streams) and Forte.
(streams) itself doesn't require gateways to communicate with Mastodon & Co. either. It speaks three protocols natively: its own Nomad, Hubzilla's Zot6 and (optionally, but on by default) standard ActivityPub.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #ActivityPub #Zot #Zot6 #Nomad #Hubzilla #Streams #(streams) #Forte #NomadicIdentity
@Feli Sorry, aber das Verlinkte läßt sich nicht immer zwingend zu 100% anwenden und im Fediverse schon mal erst recht nicht.
100 Zeichen sind zum einen eine hoffnungslos veraltete Beschränkung. Zum anderen reichen sie bei so manch einem Bild bei weitem nicht aus, um alle Qualitätskriterien einer guten Bildbeschreibung zu erfüllen. Und glaube mir, ich habe schon genügend Artikel zum Thema Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen gelesen, daß ich weiß, wovon ich spreche. Insbesondere möchte ich hier verweisen auf die Artikel von Veronica Lewis a.k.a. Veronica with Four Eyes (veroniiiica.com), die selbst sehbehindert ist.
Die Regel, daß Text in Bildern immer zu 100% originalidentisch transkribiert werden muß, kenne ich, und damit gehe ich weitgehend konform (bis darauf, daß Text, der im Original in Großbuchstaben geschrieben ist, nicht in Großbuchstaben transkribiert werden darf). Daran halte ich mich selbst, egal, wieviel Text auf meinen eigenen Bildern ist, und egal, ob er auf den Bildern, wie ich sie poste, lesbar ist oder nicht. Aber wie soll das garantiert immer in 100 Zeichen passen?
Aktuell arbeite ich seit etwa anderthalb Jahren (!) gelegentlich an den Bildbeschreibungen für eine Serie von Portraits eines digitalen Avatars in einer virtuellen 3-D-Welt; deshalb habe ich auch seit Sommer 2024 kein einziges gänzlich eigenes Bild mehr gepostet. Die Bilder haben schon einen neutralen weißen Hintergrund, damit ich den Hintergrund nicht beschreiben muß. Nun enthält aber jedes Bild drei oder vier leicht unterschiedliche Outfits. Und in den geplanten Posts mit diesen Bildern geht es um diese Outfits, d. h. die Outfits sind der Kontext.
Ich halte mich dabei an "How to create image descriptions for Red Carpet looks" von Veronica Lewis und bei Farben an die Cooper Hewitt Guidelines for Image Description vom Smithsonian Design Museum. Das heißt, das können keine superkurzen Beschreibungen werden wie z. B. bei Katzenfotos.
Die Bilder sollen sogar wie alle meine eigenen Bilder jeweils zweimal beschrieben werden: Jedes Bild bekommt eine vergleichsweise kurze Beschreibung im Alt-Text. Zusätzlich wird jeder Post einen Block enthalten mit langen, detaillierten Bildbeschreibungen inklusive allen Erklärungen, die nötig sind, um die Bilder und die Beschreibungen zu verstehen. Dieser Block wird wahrscheinlich in jedem Bilderpost jeweils länger als 20.000 Zeichen ausfallen. Das ist notwendig, weil Bilder aus virtuellen Welten im Fediverse zwingend hochdetaillierte Beschreibungen brauchen.
Trotzdem müssen natürlich auch die Beschreibungen in den Alt-Texten gewisse Mindestkriterien erfüllen. In 100 Zeichen oder weniger ist das schlicht und ergreifend unmöglich. Ich habe tatsächlich große Schwierigkeiten, die Alt-Texte auf maximal 1.500 Zeichen einzukürzen. Und nein, die sind nicht mit Füllworten aufgebläht. Ich kann sie nur weiter kürzen, indem ich gemäß den oben verlinkten Artikeln wichtige Informationen entferne.
Generell gelten im Fediverse bei Bildbeschreibungen und Alt-Texten andere Regeln als überall sonst. Das 100-Zeichen-Limit ist Bullshit. Das 125-Zeichen-Limit ist Bullshit. Das 200-Zeichen-Limit ist Bullshit. Aus technischen Gründen übrigens auch. Das einzige Limit, das gilt, ist Mastodons 1.500-Zeichen-Limit. Solange Bildbeschreibungen nicht künstlich aufgebläht sind mit Füllworten, persönlichen Wertungen etc., ist alles innerhalb dieser 1.500 Zeichen erlaubt.
Dazu gilt: Wenn jemand dich darum bittet, ein Detail auf deinem Bild genauer zu beschreiben, dann ist deine Bildbeschreibung ungenügend. Auch wenn jemand dich um Erklärungen bittet, ist das zurückzuführen auf Nachlässigkeit deinerseits (wobei allerdings Erklärungen in den Post-Text gehören und nicht in den Alt-Text). Nach Details oder Erklärungen zu fragen, ist fast so schlimm, wie überhaupt um Alt-Text bitten zu müssen.
Wenn du konsequent immer mit Alt-Texten kommst, die nie die 100 Zeichen überschreiten, dann riskierst du, daß dir jemand von Mastodons Alt-Text-Polizei deine Alt-Texte als unzureichend um die Ohren haut und dich als faul und ableistisch abstempelt. Wenn du dagegen Bilder mit 1.000 Zeichen und mehr beschreibst, besteht die Chance, daß du in der @Alt Text Hall of Fame landest.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #LangerPost #CWLangerPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta #Ableismus #AbleismusMeta #CWAbleismusMeta #AltTextPolizei #AltTextHallOfFame
100 Zeichen sind zum einen eine hoffnungslos veraltete Beschränkung. Zum anderen reichen sie bei so manch einem Bild bei weitem nicht aus, um alle Qualitätskriterien einer guten Bildbeschreibung zu erfüllen. Und glaube mir, ich habe schon genügend Artikel zum Thema Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen gelesen, daß ich weiß, wovon ich spreche. Insbesondere möchte ich hier verweisen auf die Artikel von Veronica Lewis a.k.a. Veronica with Four Eyes (veroniiiica.com), die selbst sehbehindert ist.
Die Regel, daß Text in Bildern immer zu 100% originalidentisch transkribiert werden muß, kenne ich, und damit gehe ich weitgehend konform (bis darauf, daß Text, der im Original in Großbuchstaben geschrieben ist, nicht in Großbuchstaben transkribiert werden darf). Daran halte ich mich selbst, egal, wieviel Text auf meinen eigenen Bildern ist, und egal, ob er auf den Bildern, wie ich sie poste, lesbar ist oder nicht. Aber wie soll das garantiert immer in 100 Zeichen passen?
Aktuell arbeite ich seit etwa anderthalb Jahren (!) gelegentlich an den Bildbeschreibungen für eine Serie von Portraits eines digitalen Avatars in einer virtuellen 3-D-Welt; deshalb habe ich auch seit Sommer 2024 kein einziges gänzlich eigenes Bild mehr gepostet. Die Bilder haben schon einen neutralen weißen Hintergrund, damit ich den Hintergrund nicht beschreiben muß. Nun enthält aber jedes Bild drei oder vier leicht unterschiedliche Outfits. Und in den geplanten Posts mit diesen Bildern geht es um diese Outfits, d. h. die Outfits sind der Kontext.
Ich halte mich dabei an "How to create image descriptions for Red Carpet looks" von Veronica Lewis und bei Farben an die Cooper Hewitt Guidelines for Image Description vom Smithsonian Design Museum. Das heißt, das können keine superkurzen Beschreibungen werden wie z. B. bei Katzenfotos.
Die Bilder sollen sogar wie alle meine eigenen Bilder jeweils zweimal beschrieben werden: Jedes Bild bekommt eine vergleichsweise kurze Beschreibung im Alt-Text. Zusätzlich wird jeder Post einen Block enthalten mit langen, detaillierten Bildbeschreibungen inklusive allen Erklärungen, die nötig sind, um die Bilder und die Beschreibungen zu verstehen. Dieser Block wird wahrscheinlich in jedem Bilderpost jeweils länger als 20.000 Zeichen ausfallen. Das ist notwendig, weil Bilder aus virtuellen Welten im Fediverse zwingend hochdetaillierte Beschreibungen brauchen.
Trotzdem müssen natürlich auch die Beschreibungen in den Alt-Texten gewisse Mindestkriterien erfüllen. In 100 Zeichen oder weniger ist das schlicht und ergreifend unmöglich. Ich habe tatsächlich große Schwierigkeiten, die Alt-Texte auf maximal 1.500 Zeichen einzukürzen. Und nein, die sind nicht mit Füllworten aufgebläht. Ich kann sie nur weiter kürzen, indem ich gemäß den oben verlinkten Artikeln wichtige Informationen entferne.
Generell gelten im Fediverse bei Bildbeschreibungen und Alt-Texten andere Regeln als überall sonst. Das 100-Zeichen-Limit ist Bullshit. Das 125-Zeichen-Limit ist Bullshit. Das 200-Zeichen-Limit ist Bullshit. Aus technischen Gründen übrigens auch. Das einzige Limit, das gilt, ist Mastodons 1.500-Zeichen-Limit. Solange Bildbeschreibungen nicht künstlich aufgebläht sind mit Füllworten, persönlichen Wertungen etc., ist alles innerhalb dieser 1.500 Zeichen erlaubt.
Dazu gilt: Wenn jemand dich darum bittet, ein Detail auf deinem Bild genauer zu beschreiben, dann ist deine Bildbeschreibung ungenügend. Auch wenn jemand dich um Erklärungen bittet, ist das zurückzuführen auf Nachlässigkeit deinerseits (wobei allerdings Erklärungen in den Post-Text gehören und nicht in den Alt-Text). Nach Details oder Erklärungen zu fragen, ist fast so schlimm, wie überhaupt um Alt-Text bitten zu müssen.
Wenn du konsequent immer mit Alt-Texten kommst, die nie die 100 Zeichen überschreiten, dann riskierst du, daß dir jemand von Mastodons Alt-Text-Polizei deine Alt-Texte als unzureichend um die Ohren haut und dich als faul und ableistisch abstempelt. Wenn du dagegen Bilder mit 1.000 Zeichen und mehr beschreibst, besteht die Chance, daß du in der @Alt Text Hall of Fame landest.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #LangerPost #CWLangerPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta #Ableismus #AbleismusMeta #CWAbleismusMeta #AltTextPolizei #AltTextHallOfFame
Jupiter Rowland - [email protected]
@C. I have two major issues with the Mastodon HOA.
One, they try hard to force "Mastodon standards", Mastodon culture and Mastodon's unwritten rules upon the whole Fediverse. Including places that not only aren't Mastodon, but that are very much not Mastodon. Simply because they can't see where a message is from. In fact, many of them are still fully convinced that the Fediverse is only Mastodon.
And so you have members of the Mastodon HOA yelling at someone who is allegedly "doing Mastodon wrong", but that someone is actually on Friendica and has been since as early as 2011. As in about five years longer than Mastodon has even existed. And seriously, the only places in the Fediverse that are even more different and farther away from Mastodon than Friendica (without specialising in something that Mastodon absolutely can't do) are Friendica's own descendants: Hubzilla, (streams), Forte.
The Mastodon HOA probably don't know that Friendica exists. They definitely don't know that either of the other three exists. They definitely don't know that any of the four is significantly different from Mastodon in any way. And frankly, they don't care a bit. If it appears on any Mastodon timeline, it's Mastodon to them, and it has to adapt to Mastodon's culture and follow Mastodon's rules.
Two, they don't coordinate anything among each other. They're just a bunch of lone wolves. Everyone has got their own standards, but everyone thinks their personal standards are the one and only Mastodon/Fediverse gold standards, and everyone enforces their own standards. And, of course, everyone thinks their standards can and must apply always, including in the most obscure edge-cases.
For example, they've got standards for describing real-life photos on Mastodon with a character limit of 500. And they try to enforce these standards always and everywhere. However, these standards don't necessarily work perfectly when I post a rendering from a super-obscure 3-D virtual world on (streams) with a character limit of over 24 million where I've got loads of room to write an additional long image description and put it into the post text.
The Mastodon HOA, or at least some of their members, appear to be constantly raising their minimum quality requirements for image descriptions. They must be absolutely accurate, and they must be sufficiently detailed that nobody will ever have to ask for a detail description. Oh, and they must explain whatever the audience may not know about the image or the description. (At this point, it's fair to mention that explanations must never go into the alt-text.)
Sure, I can do that. I have done so in the past. But I can't do that within Mastodon's alt-text character limit of 1,500 (Mastodon truncates longer alt-texts from outside). I can do that even less within Misskey's alt-text character limit of only 512 (Misskey and the Forkeys should truncate longer alt-texts, but due to a bug, they delete them entirely instead, giving the impression that you haven't written an alt-text at all). I can only do that in the additional long description in the post text.
If the Mastodon HOA demand I transcribe literally any and all text within the borders of an image, I can do that, too. In fact, I have done so in the past. I can transcribe bits of text verbatim which the Mastodon HOA can't even read. Which the Mastodon HOA couldn't even find in the image because they're so tiny. But there's no way that I can squeeze 20+ individual text transcripts into 1,500 characters of alt-text along with the rest of the visual description, much less into only 512 characters. The text transcripts will have to go into the long description in the post text, whether the Mastodon HOA want or not.
This means that the post will exceed the holy limit of 500 characters by huge magnitudes. This, in turn, means that when I've satisfied one Mastodon HOA member, another one comes and sanctions me for exceeding the holy 500-character limit. That is, chances are it's actually the same Mastodon HOA member.
In other words, if the content of an image is obscure enough and requires enough description, the only winning move when I want to post such an image is to not post it at all.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonCulture #MastodonHOA
One, they try hard to force "Mastodon standards", Mastodon culture and Mastodon's unwritten rules upon the whole Fediverse. Including places that not only aren't Mastodon, but that are very much not Mastodon. Simply because they can't see where a message is from. In fact, many of them are still fully convinced that the Fediverse is only Mastodon.
And so you have members of the Mastodon HOA yelling at someone who is allegedly "doing Mastodon wrong", but that someone is actually on Friendica and has been since as early as 2011. As in about five years longer than Mastodon has even existed. And seriously, the only places in the Fediverse that are even more different and farther away from Mastodon than Friendica (without specialising in something that Mastodon absolutely can't do) are Friendica's own descendants: Hubzilla, (streams), Forte.
The Mastodon HOA probably don't know that Friendica exists. They definitely don't know that either of the other three exists. They definitely don't know that any of the four is significantly different from Mastodon in any way. And frankly, they don't care a bit. If it appears on any Mastodon timeline, it's Mastodon to them, and it has to adapt to Mastodon's culture and follow Mastodon's rules.
Two, they don't coordinate anything among each other. They're just a bunch of lone wolves. Everyone has got their own standards, but everyone thinks their personal standards are the one and only Mastodon/Fediverse gold standards, and everyone enforces their own standards. And, of course, everyone thinks their standards can and must apply always, including in the most obscure edge-cases.
For example, they've got standards for describing real-life photos on Mastodon with a character limit of 500. And they try to enforce these standards always and everywhere. However, these standards don't necessarily work perfectly when I post a rendering from a super-obscure 3-D virtual world on (streams) with a character limit of over 24 million where I've got loads of room to write an additional long image description and put it into the post text.
The Mastodon HOA, or at least some of their members, appear to be constantly raising their minimum quality requirements for image descriptions. They must be absolutely accurate, and they must be sufficiently detailed that nobody will ever have to ask for a detail description. Oh, and they must explain whatever the audience may not know about the image or the description. (At this point, it's fair to mention that explanations must never go into the alt-text.)
Sure, I can do that. I have done so in the past. But I can't do that within Mastodon's alt-text character limit of 1,500 (Mastodon truncates longer alt-texts from outside). I can do that even less within Misskey's alt-text character limit of only 512 (Misskey and the Forkeys should truncate longer alt-texts, but due to a bug, they delete them entirely instead, giving the impression that you haven't written an alt-text at all). I can only do that in the additional long description in the post text.
If the Mastodon HOA demand I transcribe literally any and all text within the borders of an image, I can do that, too. In fact, I have done so in the past. I can transcribe bits of text verbatim which the Mastodon HOA can't even read. Which the Mastodon HOA couldn't even find in the image because they're so tiny. But there's no way that I can squeeze 20+ individual text transcripts into 1,500 characters of alt-text along with the rest of the visual description, much less into only 512 characters. The text transcripts will have to go into the long description in the post text, whether the Mastodon HOA want or not.
This means that the post will exceed the holy limit of 500 characters by huge magnitudes. This, in turn, means that when I've satisfied one Mastodon HOA member, another one comes and sanctions me for exceeding the holy 500-character limit. That is, chances are it's actually the same Mastodon HOA member.
In other words, if the content of an image is obscure enough and requires enough description, the only winning move when I want to post such an image is to not post it at all.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonCulture #MastodonHOA
@Pino Carafa Well, my problem is not the alt-text.
I used to limit my alt-texts to 1,500 characters because Mastodon and its forks truncate longer alt-texts at the 1,500-character mark. In the future, I will limit them to 512 characters because Misskey and its forks should truncate them at that mark if they're longer, but instead, they delete them.
But in addition to my alt-texts, I describe my original images once more (= twice altogether). The other description is what I call the "long description", and it goes directly into the post text (as opposed to the alt-text). I don't have a character limit to worry about (over 16.7 million), so I can do what's outright unimaginable from a Mastodon point of view.
It's this long description that's causing trouble.
That is, I wouldn't wonder if the Mastodon HOA were to sanction me for my alt-text not being detailed enough when I limit it to 512 characters. In fact, I wouldn't wonder if they were to sanction me because a 1,500-character alt-text of mine is lacking important elements (descriptions of certain details, transcripts of all text within the borders of the image etc.).
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonHOA
I used to limit my alt-texts to 1,500 characters because Mastodon and its forks truncate longer alt-texts at the 1,500-character mark. In the future, I will limit them to 512 characters because Misskey and its forks should truncate them at that mark if they're longer, but instead, they delete them.
But in addition to my alt-texts, I describe my original images once more (= twice altogether). The other description is what I call the "long description", and it goes directly into the post text (as opposed to the alt-text). I don't have a character limit to worry about (over 16.7 million), so I can do what's outright unimaginable from a Mastodon point of view.
It's this long description that's causing trouble.
That is, I wouldn't wonder if the Mastodon HOA were to sanction me for my alt-text not being detailed enough when I limit it to 512 characters. In fact, I wouldn't wonder if they were to sanction me because a 1,500-character alt-text of mine is lacking important elements (descriptions of certain details, transcripts of all text within the borders of the image etc.).
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonHOA
@Pino Carafa An additional advantage of this would be that I could first ask just how detailed a description they need. Like, if they really want me to spend two full days, morning to evening, to write something that'll take their screen reader three hours to read out loud.
The problem, however, is that the virtual worlds that I frequent change a lot. Everything is built by users. A place that I've shown in an image may change mere days or hours after I've been there, so when I go back to take a closer look for a detailed description, it doesn't look like on the image anymore.
Or that place may be gone entirely. For example, I could post some images from an in-world event, from places specifically built for this event. Then, two months later, someone asks for a more detailed description. But I can't write a more detailed description because I can't go back to these places, simply because these places were closed and shut down a few days after I had posted the images.
Lastly, my impression of Mastodon is still that a significant number of users do not want to ask. Whatever information they may need, they expect it all to come with the post immediately. Having to ask for a detail description or for an explanation appears to be about as bad style as having to ask for a description in the first place.
I've literally seen Mastodon toots in which people say that if they don't understand a post or an image in a post, they want an explanation to come with the post.
I've also seen a Mastodon toot in which someone said that it isn't sufficient to just say what's in an image, but you also have to describe what it looks like. Right away. And in my case, this is actually absolutely justified.
It's a catch-22: If I don't describe my images sufficiently, I risk being sanctioned by the Mastodon HOA for not describing my images sufficiently. But if I do, I risk being sanctioned by the Mastodon HOA for exceeding 500 characters in one post.
Oh, and if I chop my image descriptions into tiny chunks of no more than 500 characters, it's disturbing for my own ilk, the users of Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, who are used to not having any character limits and everything being in one message, no matter how long it is. Besides, how many Mastodon users are willing to read a thread of 120 or more posts and find that more convenient than one post with 60,000 characters?
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonHOA
The problem, however, is that the virtual worlds that I frequent change a lot. Everything is built by users. A place that I've shown in an image may change mere days or hours after I've been there, so when I go back to take a closer look for a detailed description, it doesn't look like on the image anymore.
Or that place may be gone entirely. For example, I could post some images from an in-world event, from places specifically built for this event. Then, two months later, someone asks for a more detailed description. But I can't write a more detailed description because I can't go back to these places, simply because these places were closed and shut down a few days after I had posted the images.
Lastly, my impression of Mastodon is still that a significant number of users do not want to ask. Whatever information they may need, they expect it all to come with the post immediately. Having to ask for a detail description or for an explanation appears to be about as bad style as having to ask for a description in the first place.
I've literally seen Mastodon toots in which people say that if they don't understand a post or an image in a post, they want an explanation to come with the post.
I've also seen a Mastodon toot in which someone said that it isn't sufficient to just say what's in an image, but you also have to describe what it looks like. Right away. And in my case, this is actually absolutely justified.
It's a catch-22: If I don't describe my images sufficiently, I risk being sanctioned by the Mastodon HOA for not describing my images sufficiently. But if I do, I risk being sanctioned by the Mastodon HOA for exceeding 500 characters in one post.
Oh, and if I chop my image descriptions into tiny chunks of no more than 500 characters, it's disturbing for my own ilk, the users of Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, who are used to not having any character limits and everything being in one message, no matter how long it is. Besides, how many Mastodon users are willing to read a thread of 120 or more posts and find that more convenient than one post with 60,000 characters?
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonHOA
@Pino Carafa @ᴮᵉⁿ ᴿᵒʸᶜᵉVOTE IN THE PRIMARIES @🅰🅻🅸🅲🅴 (🌈🦄) It does depend on the image, yes.
Most of the images in the Fediverse that aren't just text are real-life photographs. Real life is something that people know, that people are familiar with. For one, it isn't that exciting, and besides, even blind folks have at least got a rough idea about what stuff looks like.
When I post memes, my visual descriptions are limited to what's important in the context, and I only write one visual description per image which goes into the alt-text. However, I do add a full explanation in the post text because it appears to me like a sizeable amout of Mastodon users expect explanations for things they don't understand to be delivered to them immediately without them having to ask.
But my original images aren't real-life photos. They aren't screencaps from anything familiar either. They're renderings from extremely obscure 3-D virtual worlds.
On the one hand, I can't expect anyone to have an idea of what anything in my images looks like. If anyone sighted doubts this, I ask them to check what an avatar in Meta Horizon looks like, what an avatar in Roblox looks like and what a modern avatar in Second Life looks like (Flickr and Primfeed are good sources for the latter).
On the other hand, people may be super curious about these worlds beyond what matters in the context of a post, even or especially if they aren't fully sighted. Or the post itself is about the image, as in about the whole image as opposed to something specific in the image.
This means that I have to describe the entire image with every detail in it. And I don't describe the image by looking at the image with its limited resolution. I describe it by looking at the real thing, in-world, where the resolution is near-infinite.
My sighted audience sees a little white square with six pixels in a row that are ever so slightly less bright. They may not even notice it. I see a sign with two lines of text on it, I describe it all the way to the typeface, and I transcribe the text verbatim. This is how I sometimes end up with over 20 individual bits of text in one image that need to be transcribed.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta
Most of the images in the Fediverse that aren't just text are real-life photographs. Real life is something that people know, that people are familiar with. For one, it isn't that exciting, and besides, even blind folks have at least got a rough idea about what stuff looks like.
When I post memes, my visual descriptions are limited to what's important in the context, and I only write one visual description per image which goes into the alt-text. However, I do add a full explanation in the post text because it appears to me like a sizeable amout of Mastodon users expect explanations for things they don't understand to be delivered to them immediately without them having to ask.
But my original images aren't real-life photos. They aren't screencaps from anything familiar either. They're renderings from extremely obscure 3-D virtual worlds.
On the one hand, I can't expect anyone to have an idea of what anything in my images looks like. If anyone sighted doubts this, I ask them to check what an avatar in Meta Horizon looks like, what an avatar in Roblox looks like and what a modern avatar in Second Life looks like (Flickr and Primfeed are good sources for the latter).
On the other hand, people may be super curious about these worlds beyond what matters in the context of a post, even or especially if they aren't fully sighted. Or the post itself is about the image, as in about the whole image as opposed to something specific in the image.
This means that I have to describe the entire image with every detail in it. And I don't describe the image by looking at the image with its limited resolution. I describe it by looking at the real thing, in-world, where the resolution is near-infinite.
My sighted audience sees a little white square with six pixels in a row that are ever so slightly less bright. They may not even notice it. I see a sign with two lines of text on it, I describe it all the way to the typeface, and I transcribe the text verbatim. This is how I sometimes end up with over 20 individual bits of text in one image that need to be transcribed.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta
@Mastodon Migration Basically telling other people how they should be using Mastodon is not cool unless they are violating some instance rule.
As, by the way, is telling Fediverse users who are not on Mastodon to use whatever they use instead like Mastodon users are expected to use Mastodon.
Please don't be a Mastodon HOA enforcer.
Especially since the alt-text police of the Mastodon HOA have much higher alt-text and image description minimum standards than blind or visually-impaired people. And they seem to be raising their standards further and further.
I always try my best to be way ahead of anyone's image description minimum standards, also in order to demonstrate to the Mastodon HOA that I'm not a lazy bum, and that I do try hard to describe my images properly. For my own original images, this means that I have to describe each one of them twice, with a fairly short description in the alt-text and a much longer one in the post itself.
This, however, clashes with the Mastodon HOA, too, because they also enforce Mastodon's default 500-character limit Fediverse-wide by generously blocking everyone whom they catch exceeding it at first strike.
CC: @🅰🅻🅸🅲🅴 (🌈🦄)
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA
As, by the way, is telling Fediverse users who are not on Mastodon to use whatever they use instead like Mastodon users are expected to use Mastodon.
Please don't be a Mastodon HOA enforcer.
Especially since the alt-text police of the Mastodon HOA have much higher alt-text and image description minimum standards than blind or visually-impaired people. And they seem to be raising their standards further and further.
I always try my best to be way ahead of anyone's image description minimum standards, also in order to demonstrate to the Mastodon HOA that I'm not a lazy bum, and that I do try hard to describe my images properly. For my own original images, this means that I have to describe each one of them twice, with a fairly short description in the alt-text and a much longer one in the post itself.
This, however, clashes with the Mastodon HOA, too, because they also enforce Mastodon's default 500-character limit Fediverse-wide by generously blocking everyone whom they catch exceeding it at first strike.
CC: @🅰🅻🅸🅲🅴 (🌈🦄)
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA
@🔥Cassandra🔥 When I describe a meme-based image macro, it's rather concise. But I've got very good reasons to describe my original images at greater detail in alt-text and then once more at vastly greater detail in the post itself. It depends on what people may not know about the image but want to know.
I hope to limit my future alt-texts to a maximum of 512 characters, though. That's Misskey's limit, but Misskey currently has a bug which makes it delete longer alt-texts instead of truncating them.
That said, AI also hallucinates and guesses too much without actually knowing. This occurs the more, the more obscure the topic of an image is and the less the AI knows about it.
So if you want your image description to be accurate, you'll have to write it entirely yourself.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta
I hope to limit my future alt-texts to a maximum of 512 characters, though. That's Misskey's limit, but Misskey currently has a bug which makes it delete longer alt-texts instead of truncating them.
That said, AI also hallucinates and guesses too much without actually knowing. This occurs the more, the more obscure the topic of an image is and the less the AI knows about it.
So if you want your image description to be accurate, you'll have to write it entirely yourself.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta
@Justin Crozer @Stefan Bohacek @Lentävä Kalakukko @Roni Rolle Laukkarinen Whenever I see Mastodon users talk about "culture" in a Fediverse context, I have to wonder: What exactly do they refer to when they talk about "culture"?
Is it Fediverse culture? As in, overarching, software-independent Fediverse culture?
As in, taking into consideration that Fediverse server applications that aren't Mastodon, e.g. Misskey or Sharkey or Friendica or Hubzilla, have different cultures than Mastodon?
Recognising a post or a comment from one of these applications, acknowledging that it comes from a place with a different history, a different set of features and thus a different culture than Mastodon and refraining from enforcing Mastodon's unwritten rules against it?
Or does "culture" only refer to Mastodon's culture? Does it reject or completely disregard all cultures in the Fediverse that aren't Mastodon's and demand the whole Fediverse adopt Mastodon's culture and only Mastodon's culture?
Do these "bad eggs" include users who post more than 500 characters at once (which, by the way, is perfectly normal everywhere outside of Mastodon)?
Do these "bad eggs" include users who reply to people who haven't mentioned them first, and whom they aren't mutually following either (which, by the way, is perfectly normal in large parts of the non-Mastodon Fediverse, too)?
Do these "bad eggs" include users who quote-post Mastodon toots that must not be quote-posted (because they've had quote-posts for much longer than Mastodon, but without a no-quote flag so they can't see Mastodon's no-quote flag)?
Do these "bad eggs" incllude users who "misuse" Mastodon's CW field for summaries (because they have literally had the exact same text field as a summary field for seven years longer than Mastodon has had it as a CW field, and because having a summary field makes a whole lot of sense if your character limit is not 500, but over 16.7 million)?
Do these "bad eggs" include users who use more than four hashtags in one post (because, unlike Mastodon, the places where they are have filtering as well as automatically having messages hidden behind CW buttons deeply engrained into their cultures, but this requires the appropriate keywords to be present)?
If so, then this explains why only Mastodon users can enjoy significant reach on Mastodon: Everyone else is mass-blocked for misbehaving by Mastodon's standards.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #QuotePost #QuotePosts #QuoteTweet #QuoteTweets #QuoteToot #QuoteToots #QuoteBoost #QuoteBoosts #QuotedShares #QuotePostDebate #QuoteTootDebate #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #Fediverse #Mastodon #NotOnlyMastodon #FediverseIsNotMastodon #MastodonIsNotTheFediverse #MastodonCulture #MastodonCentricity #MastodonNormativity
Is it Fediverse culture? As in, overarching, software-independent Fediverse culture?
As in, taking into consideration that Fediverse server applications that aren't Mastodon, e.g. Misskey or Sharkey or Friendica or Hubzilla, have different cultures than Mastodon?
Recognising a post or a comment from one of these applications, acknowledging that it comes from a place with a different history, a different set of features and thus a different culture than Mastodon and refraining from enforcing Mastodon's unwritten rules against it?
Or does "culture" only refer to Mastodon's culture? Does it reject or completely disregard all cultures in the Fediverse that aren't Mastodon's and demand the whole Fediverse adopt Mastodon's culture and only Mastodon's culture?
Do these "bad eggs" include users who post more than 500 characters at once (which, by the way, is perfectly normal everywhere outside of Mastodon)?
Do these "bad eggs" include users who reply to people who haven't mentioned them first, and whom they aren't mutually following either (which, by the way, is perfectly normal in large parts of the non-Mastodon Fediverse, too)?
Do these "bad eggs" include users who quote-post Mastodon toots that must not be quote-posted (because they've had quote-posts for much longer than Mastodon, but without a no-quote flag so they can't see Mastodon's no-quote flag)?
Do these "bad eggs" incllude users who "misuse" Mastodon's CW field for summaries (because they have literally had the exact same text field as a summary field for seven years longer than Mastodon has had it as a CW field, and because having a summary field makes a whole lot of sense if your character limit is not 500, but over 16.7 million)?
Do these "bad eggs" include users who use more than four hashtags in one post (because, unlike Mastodon, the places where they are have filtering as well as automatically having messages hidden behind CW buttons deeply engrained into their cultures, but this requires the appropriate keywords to be present)?
If so, then this explains why only Mastodon users can enjoy significant reach on Mastodon: Everyone else is mass-blocked for misbehaving by Mastodon's standards.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #QuotePost #QuotePosts #QuoteTweet #QuoteTweets #QuoteToot #QuoteToots #QuoteBoost #QuoteBoosts #QuotedShares #QuotePostDebate #QuoteTootDebate #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #Fediverse #Mastodon #NotOnlyMastodon #FediverseIsNotMastodon #MastodonIsNotTheFediverse #MastodonCulture #MastodonCentricity #MastodonNormativity
@Anya Karl Und gleichzeitig sind gefühlt sämtliche Alt-Text-Aktivisten genervt davon, wenn man darüber reden will, wie Bilder beschrieben werden sollen. Also nicht ob (weil jemand keinen Bock hat, Bilder zu beschreiben), sondern wie (weil jemand die eigenen Bildbeschreibungen bis zum Gehtnichtmehr optimieren und perfektionieren will).
Es heißt immer: "Nicht drüber labern, einfach machen!"
Aber wie zum Geier soll ich wissen, daß meine Bildbeschreibungen etwas taugen, wenn nicht nur Blinde und Sehbehinderte, sondern ganz besonders und allzuvorderst die Alt-Text-Aktivisten sich strikt weigern, mir zu erklären, wie eine gute Bildbeschreibung auszusehen hat? Was da die Mindeststandards gemäß Mastodon-Kultur sind? Oder was ihre eigenen Mindeststandards sind?
Ich stecke nun wirklich sehr viel Arbeit und Mühe und Hirnschmalz und vor allem Zeit in jede meiner Bildbeschreibungen. Meine eigenen Bilder beschreibe ich sogar jeweils zweimal, im Alt-Text und dann noch einmal sehr viel detaillierter im Post selbst mit Erklärungen und sämtlichen Text-Transkripten. Ein einziges Bild kann mich Stunden oder Tage kosten, und das ist kein Witz.
Woher soll ich wissen, ob das, was ich da schreibe, ausreichend ist oder tatsächlich noch nicht ausreichend oder maßlos übertrieben, wenn ich weder Feedback erhalte noch irgendjemand mit mir darüber reden will?
Statt dessen werde ich sowohl geblockt, wenn meine Bildbeschreibungen nicht optimal sind (möglicherweise auch, weil meine Bildposts dazu neigen, einige zigtausend Zeichen länger zu sein als das per Mastodon-Kultur vorgegebene fediverseweite Limit von 500 Zeichen), als auch, wenn ich darüber reden will, wie ich es richtig machen soll.
Und trotzdem wird von mir erwartet, daß ich das weiß. Ohne mir eine Chance zu geben, das in Erfahrung zu bringen.
Das "einfach" in "einfach machen" ist Blödsinn, wenn über einem das Damoklesschwert der persönlichen Angriffe und des massiven Reichweitenverlusts schwebt, wenn man es falsch macht.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #LangerPost #CWLangerPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #MastodonKultur #Zeichenlimit #Zeichenlimits #ZeichenlimitMeta #CWZeichenlimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta
Es heißt immer: "Nicht drüber labern, einfach machen!"
Aber wie zum Geier soll ich wissen, daß meine Bildbeschreibungen etwas taugen, wenn nicht nur Blinde und Sehbehinderte, sondern ganz besonders und allzuvorderst die Alt-Text-Aktivisten sich strikt weigern, mir zu erklären, wie eine gute Bildbeschreibung auszusehen hat? Was da die Mindeststandards gemäß Mastodon-Kultur sind? Oder was ihre eigenen Mindeststandards sind?
Ich stecke nun wirklich sehr viel Arbeit und Mühe und Hirnschmalz und vor allem Zeit in jede meiner Bildbeschreibungen. Meine eigenen Bilder beschreibe ich sogar jeweils zweimal, im Alt-Text und dann noch einmal sehr viel detaillierter im Post selbst mit Erklärungen und sämtlichen Text-Transkripten. Ein einziges Bild kann mich Stunden oder Tage kosten, und das ist kein Witz.
Woher soll ich wissen, ob das, was ich da schreibe, ausreichend ist oder tatsächlich noch nicht ausreichend oder maßlos übertrieben, wenn ich weder Feedback erhalte noch irgendjemand mit mir darüber reden will?
Statt dessen werde ich sowohl geblockt, wenn meine Bildbeschreibungen nicht optimal sind (möglicherweise auch, weil meine Bildposts dazu neigen, einige zigtausend Zeichen länger zu sein als das per Mastodon-Kultur vorgegebene fediverseweite Limit von 500 Zeichen), als auch, wenn ich darüber reden will, wie ich es richtig machen soll.
Und trotzdem wird von mir erwartet, daß ich das weiß. Ohne mir eine Chance zu geben, das in Erfahrung zu bringen.
Das "einfach" in "einfach machen" ist Blödsinn, wenn über einem das Damoklesschwert der persönlichen Angriffe und des massiven Reichweitenverlusts schwebt, wenn man es falsch macht.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #LangerPost #CWLangerPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #MastodonKultur #Zeichenlimit #Zeichenlimits #ZeichenlimitMeta #CWZeichenlimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta