How Nomadic ActivityPub (FEP-ef61) compares to other protocols?
I made a table:
https://codeberg.org/ap-next/ap-next/src/branch/main/nomadpub.md#protocol-comparison
How Nomadic ActivityPub (FEP-ef61) compares to other protocols?
I made a table:
https://codeberg.org/ap-next/ap-next/src/branch/main/nomadpub.md#protocol-comparison
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.
I'll think about it. As far as I know, Zot identities are keys, all data is portable and private content is possible. I guess the main difference between Zot and FEP-ef61 would be in ActivityPub interop?
By the way: Forte doesn't require a gateway to communicate with non-nomadic ActivityPub.
No, from FEP-ef61 point of view, there's still a gateway, because Forte doesn't use canonical IDs. We can say that Forte is a client and a gateway combined in a single piece of software.