Following the recent APConf in Prague, I tried going through the resources at hand for new ActivityPub implementers, reviewing what we could improve to ease the onboarding. activitypub.rocks plays a major role in this, being the main landing page for the protocol.
In the meantime, this forum has been created and made public. It could play a major role at organizing the information long-term for varied audiences, but would not replace ap.rocks as a landing page, which means we have to properly link to the relevant parts of the forum for ap.rocks.
Now, I would normally suggest the modifications through a PR directly against the code, but I was unable to run the site code. Moreover, the 28-09 SocialCG meeting lead me to write down my suggestions here instead before deciding anything:
- a top bar featuring the main links, so as make the most important information stand out:
- a link to the spec
- a link to the forum
- a link to (a) future guide(s) aimed at implemeters? That could also be done in the “Implementers” section below, but having twice the information doesn’t hurt.
- same thing but for end users that might bump on ActivityPub before some more user-oriented project page like https://joinmastodon.org/ or the future https://joinfediverse.org.
- a rewritten “implementers” section that points to the relevant forum sections rather than the defunct test.activitypub.rocks.
- a visible rss feed button in the news section
- a rewritten news section, that includes not just the blog but also selected videos from the past AP events that present the project well
I made a demonstration at https://rigelk.gitlab.io/activitypub.rocks/ that I initially meant as a full rewrite of ap.rocks to be more hackable, including a replication of the implementation reports page. Its code is available at https://gitlab.com/rigelk/activitypub.rocks.
Questions: do you find the suggested modifications to the site valuable? Do you have other modifications in mind? Would you favor a re-implementation of the site in something more easily hackable?
an issue was created on the dustycloud/activitpub.rocks tracker: https://gitlab.com/dustyweb/activitypub.rocks/issues/11 and a mirror issue on the w3c/activipub tracker: https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/345
this issue incidentally tries to achieve part of what https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/335 diagnosed, and follows-up on https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/331