Comment by chrisaldrich: This explanation also highlights an additional idea of open itself. I have heard many in the W3C space criticize the open standard of web annotation arrived at because of the ultimate monoculture of the space. Most of the participants of the process were all related to Hypothes.is in some way and the result was a single product that implemented the standard. To my knowledge no other companies, groups, or individual programmers have separately implemented the standard.

In this sense, while the "standard" is openly defined, it isn't as open as other standards which were mote slowly evolved and implemented gradually and more broadly by various programming languages and disparate groups.

https://blogarchive.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle

Robustness principle: be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Postel

http://meatballwiki.org/wiki/InterWiki

InterWiki is the idea of having one unified Wiki system distributed across many servers.

https://spatialwebfoundation.org/

https://tantek.com/2023/051/t1/five-years-ago-w3c-social-web

https://500ish.com/mastodon-brought-a-protocol-to-a-product-fight-ba9fda767c6a

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/12/mastodon-highlights-pros-and-cons-of-moving-beyond-big-tech-gatekeepers/

Example of how ActivityPub standards don't work in practice, in part because Mastodon is an 800 pound gorilla which actively flauts or adds their own "standards".

Is this behavior/limitation part of the web standard or a Rails-specific thing?

https://iiif.io/api/search/2.0/change-log/

https://vivaldi.com/blog/blue-beanie-day/

https://blog.erinshepherd.net/2022/11/a-better-moderation-system-is-possible-for-the-social-web/

https://www.manton.org/2022/12/02/moving-from-mastodon.html

Details for moving from one instance to another.

To add some other intermediary services:

• ko-fi (site for contribution)
• GitHub sponsors (for GitPages)
• itch.io (for games)
• Gumroad (for sites and repositories)
• Patreon (for fan interaction)

To add a service for groups:

• Open Collective

To add a service that enables fans to support the creators directly and anonymously via microdonations or small donations by pre-charging their Coil account to spend on content streaming or tipping the creators' wallets via a layer containing JS script following the Interledger Protocol proposed to W3C:

• Web Monetization

If you want to know more, head to Web Monetization or Community or Explainer

Disclaimer: I am a recipient of a grant from the Interledger Foundation, so there would be a Conflict of Interest if I edited directly. Plus, sharing on Hypothesis allows other users to chime in.

https://tantek.com/2022/301/t1/twittermigration-bridgyfed-mastodon-indieweb

This is similar to the IndieWeb and web standards ideas of looking back at history to see the actual patterns of work that were beneficial.

Link to: - https://hypothes.is/a/HhAj3r1bEeyw9h_Pa4QNrA

https://www.zylstra.org/blog/2022/06/spring-83/

I've been thinking about this sort of thing off and on myself.

I too almost immediately thought of Fraidyc.at and its nudge at shifting the importance of content based on time and recency. I'd love to have a social reader with additional affordances for both this time shifting and Ton's idea of reading based on social distance.

I'm struck by the seemingly related idea of @peterhagen's LindyLearn platform and annotations: https://annotations.lindylearn.io/new/ which focuses on taking some of the longer term interesting ideas as the basis for browsing and chewing on. Though even here, one needs some of the odd, the cutting edge, and the avant garde in their balanced internet diet. Would Spring '83 provide some of this?

I'm also struck by some similarities this has with the idea of Derek Siver's /now page movement. I see some updating regularly while others have let it slip by the wayside. Still the "board" of users exists, though one must click through a sea of mostly smiling and welcoming faces to get to it the individual pieces of content. (The smiling faces are more inviting and personal than the cacophony of yelling and chaos I see in models for Spring '83.) This reminds me of Stanley Meyers' frequent assertion that he attempted to design a certain "sense of quiet" into the early television show Dragnet to balance the seeming loudness of the everyday as well as the noise of other contemporaneous television programming.

The form reminds me a bit of the signature pages of one's high school year book. But here, instead of the goal being timeless scribbles, one has the opportunity to change the message over time. Does the potential commercialization of the form (you know it will happen in a VC world crazed with surveillance capitalism) follow the same trajectory of the old college paper facebook? Next up, Yearbook.com!

Beyond the thing as a standard, I wondered what the actual form of Spring '83 adds to a broader conversation? What does it add to the diversity of voices that we don't already see in other spaces. How might it be abused? Would people come back to it regularly? What might be its emergent properties?

It definitely seems quirky and fun in and old school web sort of way, but it also stresses me out looking at the zany busyness of some of the examples of magazine stands. The general form reminds me of the bargain bins at book stores which have the promise of finding valuable hidden gems and at an excellent price, but often the ideas and quality of what I find usually isn't worth the discounted price and the return on investment is rarely worth the effort. How might this get beyond these forms?

It also brings up the idea of what other online forms we may have had with this same sort of raw experimentation? How might the internet have looked if there had been a bigger rise of the wiki before that of the blog? What would the world be like if Webmention had existed before social media rose to prominence? Did we somehow miss some interesting digital animals because the web rose so quickly to prominence without more early experimentation before its "Cambrian explosion"?

I've been thinking about distilled note taking forms recently and what a network of atomic ideas on index cards look like and what emerges from them. What if the standard were digital index cards that linked and cross linked to each other, particularly in a world without adherence to time based orders and streams? What does a new story look like if I can pull out a card either at random or based on a single topic and only see it or perhaps some short linked chain of ideas (mine or others) which come along with it? Does the choice of a random "Markov monkey" change my thinking or perspective? What comes out of this jar of Pandora? Is it just a new form of cadavre exquis?

This standard has been out for a bit and presumably folks are experimenting with it. What do the early results look like? How are they using it? Do they like it? Does it need more scale? What do small changes make to the overall form?

For more on these related ideas, see: https://hypothes.is/search?q=tag%3A%22spring+%2783%22

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268303666_MemoNote_an_annotation-based_personal_knowledge_management_tool_for_teachers

Is it just me or is there something quirky with the rel="canonical" links for docdrop so that there isn't URL parity for the annotations on docdrop and the equivalent youtube videos. I thought it used to work, but when I visit the youtube version, there are no annotations on the page. I thought this used to work the way one would expect. What changed?

I'm noticing that in this particular case there are two rel-canonical links when one might expect only one:

<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgMh6iuFbT4"><br /> <link rel="canonical" href="http://docdrop.org/video/XgMh6iuFbT4/">

Maybe the docdrop link should be a rel="alternate" instead?

cc: @dwhly

https://briansunter.com/graph/#/page/logseq-social

Brian Sunter (twitter) using Logseq as a social network platform.

What simple standards exist here? Could this more broadly and potentially be used to connect personal wikis, digital gardens, zettelkasten, etc?

Note that in this thread Dave Winer asks about how it can be tied into other standardized pieces to interconnect?

How can I hook my outlines into your net if I’m not running Logseq?

— dave.rss (@davewiner) June 13, 2022

on baggage: "package.json", for example, is not an ECMA standard

There's been a plaintext sitemap standard this whole time??? Lmao I'm an idiot.

https://write.as/matt/what-would-a-real-web3-look-like

This roughly reflects my own thoughts about the "next web".

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2021Sep/0000.html

I'm wondering exactly what problem that LOUD standard is meant to be solving exactly? It doesn't appear that any of the meta data they're listing is over and above anything that's already extant?

If you're going to propose a new set up, why not add some bits to fix the newer problems that have popped up like for paying creators? Being able to inject ads? Better track the number of listens? How far into the file did the listener get? How many ads did they hear?

And let's not forget:

Mentioned by Heather Staines

Some conventions may be emerging in a new batch of personal knowledge management tools, or amenable to them; for the duration of this document, we'll refer to these tools as [[personal knowledge management]] tools, [[roam like]] or (preferred as of the time of writing) [[wiki like]].

It would be incredibly useful to have a list of these [[Roam Research like]] tools so that they can be documented as to what level of input they can/could take and remain compatible from text, to text+[[wiki links]], to the various flavors of markdown up to full HTML perhaps.

I know a handful are documented at indieweb.org/commonplace_book

Whether or not digital gardens should follow any standards is an interesting question.

What features/functionality should a digital garden have? Is there a canonical list yet?

I wish more supported Webmention to enable the Memex dream...

Shipping code is necessary, but not sufficient for success.

Could this maybe be used when publishing content on third party sites to ping your own website?

This explanation also highlights an additional idea of open itself. I have heard many in the W3C space criticize the open standard of web annotation arrived at because of the ultimate monoculture of the space. Most of the participants of the process were all related to Hypothes.is in some way and the result was a single product that implemented the standard. To my knowledge no other companies, groups, or individual programmers have separately implemented the standard.

In this sense, while the "standard" is openly defined, it isn't as open as other standards which were mote slowly evolved and implemented gradually and more broadly by various programming languages and disparate groups.

I guess AMP is actually open-source software, but it still feels like it's something non-standard. I guess it's just an alternative open standard to the "main" web open standards.

This sounds a bit naive to me. Who would buy those set-top boxes and game consoles? And do not only consider the United States' and European markets. Wouldn't the large content providers have to adapt to how the web works if they want to reach a broader audience?

Now that the w3c has recommended eme, Is this possible?

Wonder what they mean by "open web". Web standards, presumably.

Some of the issue with this then becomes: "Who exactly creates these standards?" We already have issues with mega-corporations like Google wielding out sized influence in the ability to create new standards like Schema.org or AMP.

Who is to say they don't tacitly design their standards to directly (and only) benefit themselves?

https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices-1.1/#checkbox

Usability guidelines This site seems a bit dated in its appearance but still provides the user the opportunity to review usability standards in general, together with a rating of the weight of evidence that supports each assertion. It would take some time to go through all the information available on this site. It is also usable enough that a designer can check up on guidelines while in the middle of designing a specific project. Rating 3/5

There was some collaborative outreach, but AMP is really a Google-driven spec without significant outside input.

See also: http://ampletter.org/

"With AMP Stories, which is now in beta, publishers can combine the speed of AMP with the rich, immersive storytelling of the open web."

Is this sentence's structure explicitly saying that AMP is not "open web"?!

Google is adding a Fact Check feature to Google Search and Google News. When fact checks are available from one or more approved publishers, they will appear in the search results.

One requirement for publishers to be cited is to use the schema.org ClaimReview markup, or the Share the Facts widget.

Dave Winer points out that interoperability of software is important. Don't shun an existing standard just because you think your way is better. If you hate using some standard technology, find or write a module to convert between the standard and your preferred format.

Aurelia's standards focus means our code stays relevant down the road.

By sticking close to standards, such as upcoming EcmaScript features, Aurelia code prepares for us for the future. It encourages writing code that will be relevant 2-5 years from now, or perhaps beyond.

Jon Udell and Mike Caulfield discuss web annotation and personal wikis as tools for fact-checking on the Internet.

I’ve found Canvas to be less draconian than I’d been led to expect. More broadly, the LMS ecosystem that’s emerged — based on a standard called Learning Tools Interoperability (LTI), now supported by all the LMS systems — led me to an insight about how the same approach could help unify the emerging ecosystem of annotation systems. Even more broadly, all this has prompted me to reflect on how the modern web platform is both more standardized and more balkanized than ever before.

...

The app I’ve written is a thin layer of glue between two components: Canvas and Hypothes.is. LTI defines how they interact, and I’d be lying if I said it was easy to figure out to get our app to launch inside Canvas and respond back to it. But I didn’t need to be an HTTP, HTML, CSS, JavaScript, or Python wizard to get the job done.

https://www.eff.org/document/library-congress-2015-dmca-1201-rules

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/lowering-your-standards

L’interopérabilité est essentielle à l’avènement du Web des données liées (en éducation comme ailleurs).

Annotations are at the Web’s core.