Loqi[superfeedr] "IndieWeb Summit 2017 is upon us this weekend. If you haven’t RSVP’d it isn’t too late OR you can participate remotely." by Chris Aldrich on 2017-06-21 http://boffosocko.com/2017/06/20/indieweb-summit-2017/
[miklb]As I mentioned, I hooked up the master branch of micropub and OYS so looking at posting them now. Currently the checkin doesn’t get a kind so throws an error when displaying the post. I’m also on fence about using simple location or just hooking up my own mapbox code to display a static map as simple location currently isn’t generating anything from the micropub post from Swarm.
ZegnatHmm. I find it weird that Dave Winer calls us out for having an “exclusive approach”. I guess he does it “for reasons I'm sure I don't understand”.
aaronpkhe's going to defend RSS as long as he possibly can, at the expense of everything else, so i'm not really interested in engaging in any of those arguments
[colinwalker]My understanding of "indieweb" was that it was actually pretty lax - your own domain plus a.n.other indieweb technology such as webmentions. There was no "one thing" that made a site indieweb or not.
[colinwalker]He's definitely got an RSS sized chip on his shoulder (just look at the first posts he wrote about JSON Feed) but a versus approach definitely isn't the way to go.
cweiskewhen I crept up here i also felt pretty outsided because of all that current-tech-is-bad-we-reinvent-everything approach that is especially visible on atom+rss feed pages in the wiki
Zegnataaronpk: I am interested in all arguments that make it seem like indieweb takes an exclusive approach. Because any such arguments need adressing, imho
[kevinmarks]Dave on JSON: http://scripting.com/2006/12/20.html#godBlessTheReinventers "No doubt I can write a routine to parse this, but look at how deep they went to re-invent, XML itself wasn't good enough for them, for some reason (I'd love to hear the reason). Who did this travesty? Let's find a tree and string them up. Now."
ZegnatYeah. Those where indiewebtech1 is superseded by tech2 are fine, we can claim that. I am not sure we can claim OpenID has been superseded by any other tech just yet.
cweiskeif you remember that "superseded" on the indieweb.org wiki is the world view of a handful people and indieweb.org is not a generic encyclopedia, then it's ok
ZegnatBut if it gives a feeling of being exclusionary, I don’t think the IndieWeb website should make those claims, cweiske. Even if the core group of indiewebtech-afficionados is of a certain opinion. That’s not what “the IndieWeb” is about.
ZegnatI guess that circles back to: “what exactly is indieweb about” ;) I think mission statement discussion was on the agenda for some meeting somewhere?
aaronpkfor OpenID, it's definitely deprecated, especially since the OpenID foundation has moved on to OpenID Connect. it's debatable what tech in general has superseded it, but in the indieweb realm, it has been superseded by IndieAuth
ben_thatmustbemeRegrading JF2 Feed, I took those into consideration when writing JF2 Feed, Its written so that JF2 Feeds should be processible directly from the h-feed. Basically its just doing the HTML processing for someone else. so while it is still a side car file, and is still more code to maintain, it can be done entirely with an external service.
Zegnatben_thatmustbeme: people have successfully turned h-feed into RSS as well. What I was trying to say was that even JF2 (being “invented here”) is subject to the same criticisms as RSS as far as side-file criticisms go. Dave seems to have the weird idea that IndieWeb is against RSS for the sake of our own technologies, which simply isn’t true.
LoqiRSS is a set of XML feed file formats of varying degrees of use for syndicating time-stamped content from web sites, and sometimes used to refer more broadly to feed file formats as a whole including Atom, or even more broadly in vernacular as a synonym for feed file or even feeds or syndication as a concept https://indieweb.org/RSS
sknebelrandom observation regarding frontpage copy: we don't actually mention "personal sites" at all above the fold, and even later not very clearly. Suggestions where to add that back?
sknebelthen find something to remove in it's place. From recent feedback (which of course also is just individual anecdotes), it seems like the idea of putting your own site at the center isn't all that clear in the beginning. If someone then goes to "get started", suddenly they are prompted to have a domain, which is the first time that comes up at all
sknebelTo me initial copy right now seems a bit too much about goals (control data, connections) without mentioning the how (by having a personal site that's the core of everything) in any way
sknebeland thus instead could also be trying to sell some monolithic project, another social network (with misleading advertising, but text like this can be expected to be overly positive) or something else entirely, as long as it does something with the right buzz words
LoqiThe IndieWeb is about owning your domain, using it as your primary identity to publish on your own site (optionally syndicate elsewhere), and owning your data https://indieweb.org/IndieWeb
sknebelI'd try to bring it in each bullet point some way. Maybe "by posting on your own site, your content stays yours and in your control" for the first and extend the last point with "On your own site, you can ..."?
sknebelor find a place for the <dfn>, but not sure why. one could add it to the tagline, but I think a more generic tagline is good and it'd be too much
[miklb]I’m not advocating for a direct copy of the dfn, but if that’s the canonical definition of IndieWeb, I’d think the home page could better reflect it.
sknebelok, just wanted to make sure. my proposed changes good like that, or any details to change? Or should I wait for more feedback? (it's the frontpage after all)
tantek[miklb]: re: update the dfn - are you stating a problem to be solved? or do you have a specific suggestion? either way I definitely want to encourage you to post about what "indieweb" means for *you*
[miklb]tantek my perspective is if the wiki and dfn are meant to be a collective of what IndieWeb means, the home page and that definition should be more in line. But if the home page copy is meant to better reflect what it means, then perhaps the definition needs to be reworded.
ZegnatI think the dfn is fine, actually. More clear than the homepage in some ways: “own your own place online” is a good statement to cover IndieWeb as I see it
[shanehudson]To me indieweb is a community of people that believe in longevity and have some level of distrust when it comes to other people controlling their data.
sknebelcommunity is another great word to fit in somewhere. "we are not trying to sell you one thing, but are a community with shared interests that colloberates"
tantek[shanehudson]: yes, +1 on /longevity , and it is just one of several such /principles that this community of people has generally reflected and have rough consensus about
tantekalso, saying things like "we are not trying to sell you one thing" is a great way to make people *more* suspicious that they are being sold something