Talk:Comparison of Fediverse software: Difference between revisions
Talk:Comparison of Fediverse software (view source)
Revision as of 11:06, 11 September 2023
, 8 months agono edit summary
(Huge pile of suggestions) |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 235: | Line 235: | ||
By the way, if a feature was introduced after the project was launched, it might be interesting when it was introduced. In this case, the yes checkmark could be overridden with the year. Vice-versa, if a feature was removed, the no checkmark could be overridden with the year. | By the way, if a feature was introduced after the project was launched, it might be interesting when it was introduced. In this case, the yes checkmark could be overridden with the year. Vice-versa, if a feature was removed, the no checkmark could be overridden with the year. | ||
:Oh wow, you really put some thought into this. | |||
:You can do the changes, but make sure that no table gets too big. | |||
:On the bottom there is a template you can use to create more tables. | |||
:This is just a draft for now. Once a table is finished it could also be moved to it's separate article. | |||
:I wouldn't leave the "Fork of" empty for non-forks, but rename the column to something that makes more sense, like "Original software" or sth. like that. | |||
:Terminology should probably be it's own table, at least if there are many terms you want to explain. | |||
:Maybe one table for basic features and then separate tables for each feature category you mentioned? | |||
:I'm not sure what you mean with "less Mastodon-centric"?. How is it Mastodon-centric now and how would it be less then? | |||
:Oh and by the way, just FYI: The order of the projects as it is here (derived from the current version of the features column; so microblogging first, then other txt-based projects and so on) should be the order anywhere in the wiki (e.g. you added some projects on the bottom of the weblinks page. These should be moved upwards accordingly.) | |||
:--[[User:Paula|Paula]] ([[User talk:Paula|talk]]) 09:57, 28 August 2023 (CEST) | |||
::It's Mastodon-centric in my opinion because it takes Mastodon's features and only Mastodon's features and checks if the other projects have them, too. | |||
::First of all, it doesn't list a single feature that Mastodon doesn't have. | |||
::Also, it implies that everything is more or less like Mastodon. The "media uploads" column implies that you can add images by either uploading them ''to your post'' and thus attaching them to your post as files or not at all. This absolutely does not compute in the cases of Plume, Friendica, Hubzilla and (streams) which have built-in, managed file spaces and a workflow more like writing a blog article. In this case, you first upload your images or other media to the file space. Then you link them into the post. | |||
::And maybe it's just me, but I understand the column "moving follows" as "moving those that you follow" which implies that it isn't even possible to also move followers at all because that isn't possible on Mastodon AFAIK. | |||
::One more question: Would it make more sense to group limitations (post length, alt-text length, maximum file size) in one table or under their respective topics (post length under post features etc.)? | |||
::--[[User:Jupiter Rowland|Jupiter Rowland]] ([[User talk:Jupiter Rowland|talk]]) 11:06, 11 September 2023 (CEST) | |||