Mastodon isn't a Twitter clone but it was made to fill that exact niche. Short posts with mentions, hashtags, and URLs. Such details give the feel of a platform. The velocity, the atmosphere. On a personal level that's just what I like. And I think it would be reasonable to assume many of those who signed up do, too.
A social network is also a kind of common playground. Individuals have the capacity to spoil it for others. For example, when there was a bug in Mastodon that allowed you to make links spin, many made use of it for fun, which spoiled the experience for people with motion sickness. The more vectors there are for how information is transmitted, the more pronounced this is.
Right now, there is not a whole lot of ways that individual posts can escape their boundaries to affect the whole experience. They can use lots of line breaks or a wall of text, but it's limited by a maximum height. They can use caps, but they don't stand out that much. Custom emoji are one of the weaker spots when people use them as fonts, and that's annoying.
But adding more elements to the mix? More control over visuals? People WILL make it look ugly, that's a guarantee.
There's another angle to this. The fediverse is large, and its participants who are not Mastodon have different ideas and design philosophies. Some of them are publishing all sorts of lists and quotes and strike-through items. And when those posts show up on Mastodon, those visuals are lost.
That is not ideal, when it happens! But interoperability between systems with different goals and capabilities can't ever be full, it's a spectrum.
What does not necessarily make sense to me is the urgency and fervour with which this issue has been discussed. Although it is not uncommon for Mastodon--for whatever reason--to frame every feature request as a question of life and death, when Mastodon is ultimately a place where we make a meme out of someone's name for a day, and then someone posts a picture of What Must Not Be Named
@Gargron folks will do that. experimentation is good, though. as long as the 'content' tag is serializable as text (converting things that aren't understood to text via 'alt' attribute), then all kinds of content extensions are possible. nobody should be surprised if their site sanitizes away some of the more visually invasive features. (perhaps they turn them off themselves) it's good to just be up-front about that policy.
@Gargron it boggles my mind that people care so much about this, honestly. isn't the entire point of open source software the ability to make your own modifications? if people want it so bad, why not add it themselves? pleroma already has it, why not create an alt on a pleroma instance to... do italics, i guess?
it's really draining to have people be so aggressive about something that ultimately will go unnoticed by a huge majority. i'm with you here.
Mastodon, rich text
@Gargron “And I think it would be reasonable to assume many of those who signed up do, too.” the polls seem to tell that assumption was incorrect anyway.
Wrt. potential for abuse, I don't think there is significantly more. If you are afraid of headers for instance, we could have them be displayed with the same font size and weight than regular bold text, and it wouldn't be more disruptive. Things like emoji and unicode abuse is more disruptive.
You are right that perfect compatibility with every possible other software is not reasonable, as AP allows full HTML. However, I don't think this means we should draw a line and never move it. We can reassess the situation when it changes. Currently, software such as pleroma makes reasonable use of some HTML elements, which, once stripped, change the meaning of the statuses. We have an opportunity to change that.
re: Mastodon, rich text
@shellkr oh, you mean, like how it was not discussed, then partially reimplemented after someone made the work differently, and the initial version continuously mocked right after posting a poll?
re: Mastodon, rich text
No, I was thinking on how it got down to such a low level. It was a feature request. The discussion should have been purely technical. It wasn't.
...and it was said that all want this when it clearly is not.
@Gargron Also to add to the counter arguments why all that rich text is bad... The richer the experience, the harder the parsing the more prone it is to bugs (both functional and security ones). So I strongly prefer to keep things the way they are currently.
> Mastodon is ultimately a place where we make a meme out of someone's name for a day, and then someone posts a picture of What Must Not Be Named
Do you really mean that?
For lots of people (incuding me) social networks are places were people meet, connect, love, build friendships, find jobs, money, advices, news... Having fun is a part of this list, of course!
The features built into Mastodon directly affect the ability to pursue such goals.
@Gargron A lot of people want "pretty" text regardless of context.
Couldn't use PDF or whatever instead for when you need JS support though, because reasons.
@Gargron (The real excuse for JS in Epub is because "somebody might want to make an interactive book someday and want it to run through a ebook reader app".)
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!