Wiki: Vision for a Fedi Specification

[helge]

Hi jens. Welcome And thanks for your contribution.

@jfinkhaeuser

I’d personally stay away from the “social web” term. Most people will read “web” and think HTTP. That’d clash with the above shift in design approach.

I have a long list of thoughts on this. I start with the following quote

@aschrijver

Most important that we start speaking a common language, a Ubiquitous language (UL), right from the start.

I think these two statements go hand in hand: We need a language to describe a Fedi specification that has a few properties. I’m using the vision concept from above.

Vision / Concept: A common and inclusive language to work on

Functional requirements

• Provide reusable templates for tasks

Non-functional requirements

• Be inclusive; avoid terms that people find offensive, e.g. allowlist not whitelist.
• Minimal friction to clarify what something means
• Language does not suggest a solution

Second @jfinkhaeuser Would you be willing to take a look from time to time that we do not preclude the use of non HTTP technologies when not necessary?

Third: I personally think I made the first mistake here by talking about “Vision for a Fedi Specification”. I think the use of “a” implies that the result will be a single document. This is kind of not what I expect. I think that the result of “specifying the Fediverse” would be a sequence of documents, some of them being able to be used by arbitrary network technologies, some requiring HTTP.