Post #2923725

2026-03-01 07:59 UTC

@steve@social.technoetic.com @silverpill@mitra.social i assume the Undo would have a result that describes that? so Undo(Follow) might have a result of Remove from Follow.actor.following+Follow.object.followers in theory. for the other way around the Follow doesn't have a result but the Accept(Follow) has a result of Add to Follow.object.followers+Follow.actor.following but i think Follow is a bad example because it really should be subscription record management instead, ideally.

Replies (2)

@trwnh@mastodon.social 2026-03-01 08:06

@steve@social.technoetic.com @silverpill@mitra.social the other question is if this level of explicitness is useful. the answer AP spec gives is "no, just assume every server SHOULD do this". and a tangent for follows: they are too stateful. you send Follow and Accept and someone knowing about those two might assume you are a follower now but not be aware of later removal or undoing (of either the Follow or Accept). this is broken in practice for years because Follow/Accept follow is not expressive enough

Open ##2923726
@steve@social.technoetic.com 2026-03-01 08:09

@trwnh@mastodon.social @silverpill@mitra.social Yeah, it's not the only bad example of side effects specified in AP. Most of the side effects are optional (SHOULD) and outbox delivery (federated or local) isn't described as a side effect. I think that's one of most significant side effects of posting an activity to the outbox.

Open ##2923728