Good point.
And I make mine clear since we talked about Zot based on this:
Eugen is a clever developer and I respect him, but he simply does not have the experience and insights into creating global protocol decisions that might potentially affect billions of people and will work equally well for Twitter clones and newspaper publishers and bloggers.
I agree. But it is a matter of who gets funded.
And I want to thank you all for the solidarity to get ActivityPub conformant softwares instead the minimal mastodon API. But about
The W3C/ActivityPub editors decided that since Mastodon has more potential “users” than any other ActivityPub adopters, Mastodon’s implementation is being praised as the gold standard for interoperability.
WTF?
Did he ever attend a meeting, e.g. one of the 20 last Social CG meetings?
I have exactly the opposite impression !
The W3C/ActivityPub editors want “diverse clients with generic LD-Servers” –
that was made clear a thousand times !!!
Whatever has Eugen to do with the ActivityPub authors ???
I mean nobody uses ZOT but that is not our problem nor should it become!
This is clearly a matter of funding. For sure not a matter of the authors.
Now we have an exclusive group of implementors having access to FediDB which looks like a thing to test the mastodon API.
But we (the now 5 teams who wait) have no idea.