Post AZ6BjMFm8qRI0MOZSC by strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
 (DIR) More posts by strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
 (DIR) Post #AZ4KtUCvvwzoqE3Btw by grishka@mastodon.social
       2023-08-24T04:57:43Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Working on private messages in #Smithereen and I'm wondering how much sense CWs make for them. From Mastodon's PoV, "private messages" are just posts. They thus share all the same properties. In my implementation, however, messages are distinct from posts, both in the UI and in the database. In my UI I don't have anywhere to display that content warning as a spoiler without it being super awkward. I can use it as a subject line however 🤔Any thoughts?#activitypub #mastodev
       
 (DIR) Post #AZ4KtV0YxQh9K9GpG4 by mike@macgirvin.com
       2023-08-24T21:12:17Z
       
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       Be advised there may or may not be anything deserving of a warning in the summary field. It's purely a Mastodon convention. The de facto usage definition comes from the early work on RSS by news organisations in the mid 90s. What they wanted was titlesummary (brief description)bodyMost syndication/federation protocols were built around that model. ActivityStreams maps these to name, summary, and content. Content warnings really belong elsewhere, but this wasn't offered in the AS spec. This might be a good subject for an FEP, so that there's something well-defined to use instead of summary. I for one would adopt it in a heartbeat to get our summary field back.  My advice to @Gregory would be to ignore summary completely on DMs if they don't fit your UX design, but hide images if sensitive is set. People can lose their jobs (or got to jail) over "indecent" images popping up without warning.
       
 (DIR) Post #AZ4lMhYrxeaDSnu0jA by strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
       2023-08-25T02:55:47Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @mike > something well-defined to use [for CW] instead of summary. I for one would adopt it in a heartbeat to get our summary field backWhy not use title? After all, when a post from Mastodon and similar micro-posting AP apps  has CW, a title is essentially what it is.
       
 (DIR) Post #AZ6BjLWkqEQVkjKcHQ by mike@macgirvin.com
       2023-08-25T09:33:20Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Many of our members post with titles - quite often in fact. We don't hide the content when a post has a title. Telling me I have to  hide the content when there's a title is even worse than telling me to hide it when there's a summary. Hubzilla for instance lets you import RSS feeds into your stream. Lots of RSS software adds summaries whether you like it or not. Some only post summaries with no content. So once again, please let's get rid of this abomination and create a real content warning indicator so we can use summary as a "summary" like we have for decades.
       
 (DIR) Post #AZ6BjMFm8qRI0MOZSC by strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
       2023-08-25T19:25:53Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @mike> We don't hide the content when a post has a titleGood point, I hadn't thought of that. I guess I'm not the target audience for the CW feature anyway. If the client I use has a setting for treating a CW as a title and showing the body anyway, I always use it.