search

w3c / activitystreams

Activity Streams 2.0
https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/
Other
276 stars 61 forks source link

Validator link is down #519

Open ross-spencer opened 2 years ago

ross-spencer commented 2 years ago

Please Indicate One:

Please Describe the Issue:

Coming from the W3C docs and then checking out the GitHub, I see that the validator link is down. Looking at archive.org, likely since 2018? https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://as2.rocks/ There's one related issue too. It'd be good to have some information about this and its implications for folks, and alternative options?

sebilasse commented 2 years ago

Yes, we informed the responsible person 4 years ago but nobody else got access to the domain. See also https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/https-test-activitypub-rocks-certifiicate-has-expired/2233/4

@cpmoser did https://github.com/yuforium/activity-streams-validator and maybe APdebug will help too: https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/student-dev-making-the-first-steps-with-activitypub-and-doing-a-video/2401/4

ross-spencer commented 2 years ago

Thanks @sebilasse I will take a look at these links!

drazisil commented 1 year ago

https://as2.rocks/ has now been claimed by an unrelated entity and should be removed to prevent possible damage from hostile actors.

akuckartz commented 1 year ago

@drazisil Can you please raise a new issue for that problem?

BTW: https://as2.rocks/ (ending with slash) and https://as2.rocks (without a slash at the end) are forwarded to different places.

drazisil commented 1 year ago

@drazisil Can you please raise a new issue for that problem?

BTW: https://as2.rocks/ (ending with slash) and https://as2.rocks (without a slash at the end) are forwarded to different places.

I don't quite follow. Are you saying that as2.rocks is a silent proxy? Otherwise it's the same server.

jeherve commented 11 months ago

Since the link now redirects to an unrelated third-party service, I think that may bump this issue's priority. To solve the issue, it may be best to remove the link for now, even if no alternative exists as of today.

Once a new validator service exists to replace the old one, a new issue can be opened for that.

evanp commented 11 months ago

I lost access to this domain a few years ago through neglect. I will see what I can do to get it back; otherwise, I agree we should remove it from the documentation or add an erratum.

It would be interesting to set up a validator again. I think I have the code still available, so it might be possible to set up the validator on a different, more permanent, domain.