Untitled attachment

Notices where this attachment appears

1. Yuri Volkov (yvolk@loadaverage.org)'s status on Friday, 29-Sep-2017 06:00:09 UTC Yuri Volkov
   @cwebber Reposting to make sure you received my reply. Where should I file this #ActivityPub issue?
   The #ActivityPub spec's problem is not in that simplistic phrase "users are represented as actors here".
   The problem is that there is NO technical description of the whole domain model layer: relation between Actors (e.g. Person) and Users of servers. Current version will be interpreted as having one-to-one relation between the two _different_ kinds of entities, and that _is_ incorrect
   ?!
   My first post on this subject was:
   Contemplating on correct implementation of a data model, corresponding to the #ActivityPub specification, I started to realize that current version of the document https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub has a gap/confusion of two different notions: Person (one of Actor types, see https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#dfn-person ) and a User of a server (quote from ActivityPub spec: "users are represented as "actors" here")
   Actually these are very different notions: a Person may be represented as more than one User, on different servers. And a User may represent not a Person, but e.g. an Organization.
   ?!
   @clacke