64 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
64 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
title: "Leveraging JSON-LD compound typing for behavioural hinting in ActivityPub"
|
|
date: "2019-10-02"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
ActivityStreams provides for a multitude of different actor and object types, which ActivityPub capitalizes on effectively. However, neither ActivityPub nor ActivityStreams provide a method for hinting how a given actor or object should be interpreted in the vocabulary.
|
|
|
|
The purpose of this blog post is to document how the litepub community intends to provide behavioural hinting in ActivityPub, as well as demonstrate an edge case where behavioural hinting is useful.
|
|
|
|
## A Quick Refresher: what unhinted ActivityStreams objects look like
|
|
|
|
This is an example actor, which is a relay service. It represents how relay services appear now.
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{
|
|
"@context": [
|
|
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
|
|
"https://pleroma.site/schemas/litepub-0.1.jsonld"
|
|
],
|
|
"id": "https://pleroma.site/relay",
|
|
"type": "Application",
|
|
"endpoints": {
|
|
"sharedInbox": "https://pleroma.site/inbox"
|
|
},
|
|
"followers": "https://pleroma.site/relay/followers",
|
|
"following": "https://pleroma.site/relay/following",
|
|
"inbox": "https://pleroma.site/relay/inbox"
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
As you can tell, the `type` is set to `Application`, which when interpreted as a JSON-LD document expands to `https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Application`.
|
|
|
|
## Hinting objects through compound typing
|
|
|
|
In ActivityPub, different activities impose different side effects, but in many cases, it is not necessarily optimal to impose all side effects in all contexts. To know when we want to impose certain side effects or not, we need more semantic knowledge of the _intention_ behind an object.
|
|
|
|
To solve this semantic quandry, JSON-LD provides a mechanism known as compound typing. In other words, an object can be two or more different types at once. For example, a `Person` object could also be a `Mother` or a `Partner` object as well.
|
|
|
|
How does this apply to ActivityPub? By using the same mechanism, we can effectively hint the object to indicate how an implementation should ideally treat it:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{
|
|
"@context": [
|
|
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
|
|
"https://pleroma.site/schemas/litepub-0.1.jsonld",
|
|
{"Invisible": "litepub:Invisible"}
|
|
],
|
|
"id": "https://pleroma.site/relay",
|
|
"type": ["Application", "Invisible"],
|
|
"endpoints": {
|
|
"sharedInbox": "https://pleroma.site/inbox"
|
|
},
|
|
"followers": "https://pleroma.site/relay/followers",
|
|
"following": "https://pleroma.site/relay/following",
|
|
"inbox": "https://pleroma.site/relay/inbox"
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Voila! Now an implementation which understands type hinting will understand that this relay service should not be visible to end users, which means that side effects caused by it doing it's job shouldn't be visible either.
|
|
|
|
Of course, respecting such hinting is not mandatory, and therefore any security-dependent functionality shouldn't depend on behavioural hints. But security aside, they do have their uses.
|
|
|
|
I have assigned the `litepub:Invisible` type as the first behavioural hint, for cases where side effects should not be visible to end users, as in the case of relaying and group chats (what matters in both cases is that the peer discovers the referenced message instead of showing the Announce activity directly).
|