@youronlyone the problem with having a single webfinger service that resolves to actors on each of those services is that it would need to understand the storage particulars for each of them, which is possible, but I doubt that anyone is interested in doing.
@mariusor It is preferable. Though I can't imagine how a client can determine what the user wants to view.
For example, if someone from InstanceA running Firefish wants to view my Pixelfed, but I have other software running behind it.
It will probably require all existing software to add an interface to let the user select.
It's probably a good first step to implement the basic, one software for one custom WebFinger. As to what happens if the user migrates to a different software…
But, as an end-user, it is also more manageable for me to have a 1:1 setup. Like in my examples, @-photos.youronly.one for my Pixelfed and @-reading.youronly.one for my BookWyrm, and so on.
(Hopefully I understood your reply correctly. ^_^:)
> Though I can't imagine how a client can determine what the user wants to view.
@youronlyone the client only knows about some type of content, and you as the user know what kind of content you want to see, therefore you select the proper client. If you want to see images, you use pixelfed, if you want to see short form text, you use pleroma/mastodon/firefish.
Add comment