You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Based on implementer feedback from @aaronpk and @sebsel, it may make more sense to move the "reply" recognition step to 2nd to last in the Response Type Algorithm, that is, right before the "else it is a mention".
Specifically, anyone posting a "like", "repost", "RSVP", (or any other new response type!) has incentive to provide u-in-reply-to fallback plain text equivalent perhaps in p-summary that expresses the reaction/response as prose, e.g.:
like: "Tantek liked this post"
repost: "Tantek reposted this at URL"
tag-of: "Tantek tagged Sebastian in this photo"
This way even if the receiving site only supports receiving Webmention replies/comments, something sensible will still show up, and provide a good experience to the author of the response, the author of the post, and any readers of the post.
If we formalize this kind of fallback markup as a publishing guideline (perhaps a feature request for https://github.com/microformats/h-entry) it also provides a nice path forward for expanding response types over time that provide meaningful behavior even to existing systems without explicit support for the new response types.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
changed the title
Response Type: consider "reply" for 2nd to last for fallback use-casesJul 21, 2017
You'll have to help me understand this a bit better. Are you saying that newer kinds of replies, for example edits, should also include the u-in-reply-to class along with their own class (u-edit-of in this case) so that the author of the post can at least show it as a reply (if reply becomes the 2nd to last step)?
@prtksxna precisely! All (especially newer) responses should include the u-in-reply-to to enable fallback behavior with p-summary with any consuming code that may or may not understand that particular type of response.
Resolve issue #25 with proposed change moving in-reply-to / reply recognition to last of explicit response type recognition (right before mention catchall for response type algorithm, and right before non-response types in full post type discovery algorithm).
Link issue #s in changes section for easier accessibility.