[fluffy]anyway, so like, had a good conversation earlier today with someone with similar aspirations, and they did a good job of convincing me that rather than using web-hosted resources, it'd be better to focus on things like WebTorrent for the actual content distribution
[tantek][fluffy] [j12t] my "simple" answer to your question about "whose space" and how does your avatar show up in a space etc. is that this is a *hard problem*, and that the closest we have in "flatland" is everyone has their own website (space) and we agree to allow showing a non-programmatic image + text label representation that other people bring (<img> + name as text)
[fluffy]yeah, the main reason i felt IndieAuth was a good fit for this was because it already has a mechanism for providing profile data, and there could be a `u-vr-avatar` property or the like.
[tantek]if you really want to get into how much harder this can be, like say you want a "live" image instead of a static image, then ask the same question but with <iframe> instead of <img>
[fluffy]There's already transmission formats for avatars (for vtubing) and while they aren't quite suitable for VR yet, it's easy to imagine extending them to be
[fluffy]but also a thing about avatars in VR is people love being able to switch them on the fly so it really shuld be something associated with the session, not the user
[fluffy]right but there's a lot of things about social VR that make it very very different from that interaction model and the IndieWeb metaphors don't map well to the VR metaphors
[tantek]you could literally update the webmention of your most recent comment with a new h-card with a new photo to change your avatar "live" in the "session" (post)
[fluffy]yes I mean you can strain metaphors as far as you like, but I feel like it'd be better to focus on VR as its own thing to start with before trying to figure out how to map it into IndieWeb concepts
[fluffy]I never felt like the interaction part was even indieweb-related, I was more interested in the indieweb aspects of how to distribute the content and making the connections between people and sessions etc.
[fluffy]like personally I think there's a place for having your content be distributed as glTF bundles hosted via HTTP and so on, but there's also privacy issues to be concerned with for that
[tantek]I think in the use-case where you have realtime interaction at the core, it becomes even more important for the "content" (the 3D map of the room / objects in which they're interacting) to be "run" by a server
[fluffy]yeah what I'm envisioning is that there's a WebRTC "host" that starts out by pulling in the known initial state and then it subscribes to updates from all the users, and then when a new user joins it has *that* data to send to the newcomer
[tantek]anyway to get actual realtime dynamic representations, you need something like the containing document vs embedded iframe relationship, and that's going to be *at least as hard* as the 2D HTML page with an iframe inside structure in terms of privacy & security, cross-origin communication etc.
[tantek]the problem with Zoom and any "single server" or "single vendor" existing examples is that they completely ignore the who has agency to do what at the protocol level problem
[tantek]I'm saying I'm not expecting a "start from scratch with 3D" approach to have any better luck or not have any of the same complexity problems that HTML has with iframes
[tantek]so sure, people can go off and start from scratch if they really want (have the time etc.) but IMO that will likely result in all the same re-solving of existing solved problems (but worse) that we saw with the parallel RDF-web, or the parallel XML-web, or most recently, the parallel JSON-API-web
[tantek]fundamentally if this is supposed to run across multiple servers, with different entities "in control" of those servers, they're going to have to solve the same problems (and more) that HTML / iframes already have/do.
[fluffy]Anyway. I don't think the problem of distributing 3D/VR worlds is inherently that difficult, and the problem of getting multiple people into the same VR session isn't that difficult. Sharing avatars gets a bit more difficult, Protecting user privacy is the hard part, when you have to worry about what things are watching the various HTTP transfers of rooms/assets/avatar parts/etc.
[tantek]but what does non-persistent even mean when there's a room that always has at least someone in it, and therefore the "stuff" in that room that's created or moved around has some expectation of physical continuity?
[tantek]at some point, if there's *any* expectation of continuity (instead of everything blipping / disappearing when people log off), then there's an expectation of at least some persistence
[tantek][fluffy] I have a feeling you may have also read Snowcrash before the Web was really a thing (e.g. in 1992 when it came out) so I bet we could have some interesting conversations about the models/interactions depicted therein without necessarily being "constrained" by web technologies
[fluffy]and a lot of people are rushing to write a VRChat replacement, but they're all making the same mistakes of VRChat, so I'm trying to like. Evangelize the notion of not making a platform, but a protocol. And trying to get people on board with using IndieWeb stuff as appropriate.
LoqiIt looks like we don't have a page for "Virtual Reality" yet. Would you like to create it? (Or just say "Virtual Reality is ____", a sentence describing the term)
omz13GWG, ticket request and ticket deposit were pretty much based on existing practice; ticket wanted slightly extended things, but falls back to existing practice; obo-flow is has similar aims to TicketAuth but does so diferently and with room for further methods.
omz13Plus, my spec was essentially a summary and tidying up of what has been implemented now (again with the exception being the addition of obo-flow). It is also written more towards RFC style than W3C style.
[campegg]I’m trying to own a couple more of my silo links, but am running into a bit of an issue configuring nginx for Strava. I’d like to have `/strava` redirect to my profile (`https://strava.com/athletes/273720`), but have `/strava/[?]` redirect to the appropriate activity (`https://strava.com/activities/[?]`) — is it possible to do this kind of conditional redirect (i.e. if there’s something following `/strava`, go to the `/activ
[campegg]URL, else go to the `/athletes` URL)? I’ve done a bit of googling (ddg-ing?) around, but can’t seem to find anything that matches my use case.
[campegg]Awesome! Thanks [sknebel] and [aaronpk]! A combo of both sets of advice got me there… regex match rule for the activities first, followed by a exact match rule for the profile got me exactly what I wanted
omz13GWG: IIRC, subject was taken from the way some of the RFCs refer to different parties in a transaction... and a participant may change role depending on whether they act as client or server for a specific operation.
[tantek]campegg, the Strava URL structure is an interesting use-case, as is what you’re doing with it. you’re partially adjusting their URL structure rather than accepting it entirely or redesigning it completely
[campegg]I struggled with it a bit… it’s not like (e.g.) Twitter, where activity on the network is basically appended to the profile URL, so went with /strava for the profile, and /strava/[activity id] for the actual activities. Am definitely open to suggestions for a better approach, though
[schmarty]so doing ownyourlinks in this way means you can also pave over some URL-as-API weirdness you don't like in the service you're redirecting to!
[tantek]yes, you can, and yet then you're signing up to "support" (i.e. provide redirects for) some new URL structure variant which is not quite what the silo URL structure is
[tantek]a lot of these silos are based on a global post ID and thus there is an opportunity to further "simplify" the URL structure (on your own site) down to "silo" / "post id" and then redirect that as needed for now. That way if/when you completely replace those silo redirects with content on your own site, all you need is a local lookup for your post IDs from that silo (available in nearly every export)
[campegg]That’s pretty much where I ended up (I think… please correct me if I’m not following). The nginx rules I ended up with after a few more tweaks are “`location ~ ^/strava(/.[0-9]*) { return 307 https://strava.com/activities$1; }`” and
[campegg]“`location ~ ^/strava(/?$) { return 307 https://strava.com/athletes/273720; }`“, which gives me `/strava` (or `/strava/`) for my profile, then `/strava/[activity id]` for my activities. I also show a subset of the activity data on my own site at `/activities/[activity id]` (e.g. https://campegg.com/activities/2425318828)
[campegg]Why is that? I store all of the data locally, so am referencing it from a local source, but also have a ‘local id’ attached to each activity too, so could use that
[tantek]if you have a local ID already, use that instead, and then put code in your redirection to map that to the equivalent silo ID for the redirection
[campegg]Got it. I don’t really have a global id space… each content type--note, post, activity, etc--on my site has it’s own id structure (because I didn’t really think through my architecture properly), but I can see what you’re getting at. And now I think I need to go back and rebuild a whole bunch of stuff to correct some sub-optimal decisions that I’ve made
[tantek]this is one of the reasons that a bunch of us (see /URL_design) went down the path of "global id space first" in our URLs, where that "ID" is actually some form of explicitly (readably) date-based ID
[tantek]a key nice aspect of using /YYYY/ as your first segment is that it allows you the opportunity to *change* your rules/structure of your URLs every year if need be
gRegorHm, I need to update my templates. I think because the u-bookmark-of is inside e-content, indienews shows the content instead of a linked headline
@mitsuhikoI think GraphQL is quickly moving to one of my least favorite technologies. Building an efficient query system for the server is almost writing a database and as a user it has a lot of rough edges. Good idea but man is it complex. (twitter.com/_/status/1552694954190950406)
[tantek] [fluffy] [j12t] my "simple" answer to your question about "whose space" and how does your avatar show up in a space etc. is that this is a *hard problem*, and that the closest we have in "flatland" is everyone has their own website (space) and we agree to allow showing a non-programmatic image + text label representation that other people bring (<img> + name as text)
[fluffy] Anyway. I don't think the problem of distributing 3D/VR worlds is inherently that difficult, and the problem of getting multiple people into the same VR session isn't that difficult. Sharing avatars gets a bit more difficult, Protecting user privacy is the hard part, when you have to worry about what things are watching the various HTTP transfers of rooms/assets/avatar parts/etc.
IWDiscordGateway <capjamesg> What is the topic de jour?
Loqi It looks like we don't have a page for "vrchat" yet. Would you like to create it? (Or just say "vrchat is ____", a sentence describing the term)
omz13 If some more eyes could look over it (https://github.com/indieweb/indieauth/issues/113), it would be useful: perhaps aaronpk from the OAuth side and [tantek] at the user cases?
[schmarty] can't find a reference for this at the moment but i like the sentiment that a URL structure is a defacto API
@AaronGustafson You can now use webmentions in Eleventy via a plugin rather than rolling the whole thing yourself. https://buff.ly/3PRimRK (twitter.com/_/status/1553088722362580993)
[aciccarello] That's cool. I might add that to mine
@mitsuhiko I think GraphQL is quickly moving to one of my least favorite technologies. Building an efficient query system for the server is almost writing a database and as a user it has a lot of rough edges. Good idea but man is it complex. (twitter.com/_/status/1552694954190950406)