109 lines
4.2 KiB
Markdown
109 lines
4.2 KiB
Markdown
|
+++
|
||
|
|
+++
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# Note vs Article
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Discussion: <https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/resolving-the-note-vs-article-distinction/258>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
in summary:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> Note: Represents a short written work typically less than a single paragraph in length.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> Article: represents any kind of multi-paragraph written work.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
but this is contradicted by as2/ap examples
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## the practical difference
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
a Note will be displayed inline in Mastodon, but an Article will be converted to name/summary + url/id
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
further recommendations for microblog compatibility:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- a Note SHOULD still work with a plaintext fallback, as most html could be stripped
|
||
|
|
- a Note SHOULD NOT have a name/title, as this will be ignored
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
if you don't care about Mastodon or similar microblogging impls then do whatever. some guidelines/thoughts below...
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## failed ideas for distinction
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### a "paragraph"
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
perhaps a note could have no line breaks or only a single `<p>` tag, while an article does? well there's an example that directly contradicts this! ActivityPub example 4 uses two `<p>` tags inside a Note's content
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### titles
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
some say a Note has no title but an Article does -- this is not strictly true in all cases, a Note can have a `name` (and AS2-Vocab example 43 does so)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### formatting
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
some say a Note has no formatting but an Article does -- this is not true at all, as Note can be HTML and is in fact assumed to be HTML by default (per AS2-Vocab definition of `mediaType`)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### length
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
perhaps a Note has some character limit and an Article doesn't -- but what is the limit? completely arbitrary. not worth making this distinction
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## what's left for distinction?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### syndication
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
an Article might be expected to be syndicated (think HTML `<article>`) since it is a self-contained piece of content. whereas a Note might not be
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/sections.html#the-article-element>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> The article element represents a complete, or self-contained, composition in a document, page, application, or site and that is, in principle, independently distributable or reusable, e.g. in syndication. This could be a forum post, a magazine or newspaper article, a blog entry, a user-submitted comment, an interactive widget or gadget, or any other independent item of content.
|
||
|
|
>
|
||
|
|
> Note: When used specifically with content to be redistributed in syndication, the article element is similar in purpose to the entry element in Atom.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
however this may imply that microblog posts should be sent out as Article? requires further thought
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### formality
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
an Article is "published" in a formal context whereas a Note is presented in an informal context
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
definitions for "article often stress that it is an independent unit of writing, and is often published.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
dictionary.com:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> a written composition [...] forming an independent part of a [...] publication
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
merriam-webster:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> a distinct section of writing [...] often numbered
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> [a] composition [...] usually forming an independent part of a publication
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
in other words a Note may be viewed in passing, while an Article is more persistent
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## indieweb perspective
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
indieweb seems to take this view <https://indieweb.org/Semantics_Of_Article-Note_Distinction>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> post name/title [though discounted above]
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> non-trivial structure [akin to formality -- headings?]
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
> plain text vs markup [basically the p-content vs e-content argument]
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## takeaway thoughts
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
i would tend to assume everything is an article by default, with certain characteristics making it tend toward being a note instead
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
for content:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- no headings?
|
||
|
|
- no formatting?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
for metadata:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- no `name`?
|
||
|
|
- no `id` (transient or anonymous objects)?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
but it's really that last one that seems most salient to me. consider an Article to be a top-level text container that can be referred to later since it forms an independent published unit of writing. consider a Note to be an anonymous text container to be embedded in other objects. in practical terms, a Note might be used for actor metadata, in which case it would have a `name` but still be a Note
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
```yaml
|
||
|
|
type: Note
|
||
|
|
name: "Pronouns"
|
||
|
|
content: "they/them"
|
||
|
|
```
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
note that Note might still have an id, though... so really it's just a vague ill-defined "intention". for example, maybe use a Note for a "status update" in a chat/presence sense? like XMPP PEP.
|