new from me: FR#156 - Share Where?

on @Mastodon 's new Share button, the Mastodon API and protocol ownership

https://connectedplaces.online/reports/fr156-share-where/

FR#156 – Share Where?

On Mastodon's new Share button, and protocol ownership.

connectedplaces.online

@fediversereport

The Mastodon API is open source, but it is not an open standard. It is designed, maintained, and changed by one project, without input from the rest of the ecosystem.

Not without. The design of this API is shaped by the needs Mastodon users. Sometimes PRs are submitted by developers of 3rd party clients and by developers of other servers. Independent implementers of Mastodon API often extend it, and copy each other's extensions, there is even a discussion about Mastodon API Enhancement Proposals (similar to FEPs).

So I think that by now it is very much an open standard.

ActivityPub API may have W3C's stamp or approval, but that doesn't mean anything if nobody uses it.

P.S. Does your blog not federate anymore?

@silverpill @Connected Places The problem with the Mastodon client API is still that it's a Mastodon API. As in, geared towards only one Fediverse server application. In fact, as in, geared towards a very lack-lustre server application that lacks features which have been present in many other places in the Fediverse for years.

This means that you can use a whole lot of microblogging server applications with Mastodon clients. You can even use Friendica with some Mastodon clients. But then you're limited to the features which Mastodon has as well because the Mastodon client API doesn't support any features that Mastodon doesn't have. Why should it, after all?

At the end of the day, the Mastodon client API is designed and maintained by the Mastodon developers. It's them who decide what it can do and what it can't do. For one, they won't waste their time adding features to it that Mastodon itself doesn't have. Besides, if they did, they'd support Mastodon's direct competition and strengthen their advantages over Mastodon when they could throw rocks into their paths instead like they've always done.

This, by the way, is also one reason why both the developers of Hubzilla and the developer of (streams) and Forte refuse to implement the Mastodon client API. It simply wouldn't cover at least 90% of the features of these server applications, including features which you'll need all the time, everyday. That, and they don't want their software to end up at the mercy of Mastodon's developers and Mastodon's product politics by making it depend on Mastodon's technology. They'd rather have no native mobile app at all (and currently they do).

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Mastodon #Hubzilla #Streams #(streams) #Forte #MastodonAPI #MastodonClientAPI
Netzgemeinde/Hubzilla