On 12 December 2012 22:05, Rob Myers
<address@hidden> wrote:
On 12/12/12 20:50, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
More productive would be pointers to evidence of interop, please.
http://status.net/wiki/OStatus/Interop
Thanks for providing these pointers. They are well put together and on first impression prove quite compelling.
However, not a single row has a completed green tick section.
One reason is that OStatus is a massive undertaking to implement, and no one has done it right yet.
That is even if the green ticks are up to date, which is not a given, when the protocol seems to change from week to week.
Present:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OStatus#Support
I see two hyperlinks.
One is
status.net from Evan who is one of the inventors.
One is friendica, a project that I really like. My impression is that Friendica left the so-called "federated social web" (or was asked to leave, im not sure which) because they expressed there was far too great an emphasis on OStatus.
Future:
http://mediagoblin.org/pages/tour.html
That does look good.
I do buy in to the dream of a distributed social web as envisioned in the original concept.
OStatus is very well presented and I can see why people make an effort to give it a try.
But, having studied and followed the technology in great detail, im not so convinced that OStatus is the one social protocol to rule them all, or even interoperable with solutions that follow web standards.
A more general question is, what is the rationale for a GNU project favouring a proprietary protocol, over other technologies?
- Rob.