'Zot6' is sometimes mentioned in discussions with Hubzilla folks to distinguish that project's frozen protocol implementation (nearly always displayed as 'Zot6/Nomad'); but if you're speaking in general terms about the underlying nomadic protocol in documentation, be advised that some folks in the fediverse get pretty riled up over dead-naming.
using zot just the first 2
Are you absolutely sure aboutthat?So if I [b]use[/b] [size=large]HTML[/size] to write a [i]post[/i], then that works too. It is converted to [url=https://hzhelp.pepecyb.hu/en/usermanual/bbcode.html]bbCode[/url] anyway.
Nomad sends messages encoded in ActivityStreams (the same serialisation format used by ActivityPub). As does Zot6. So technically the only difference between an ActivityPub message and a Nomad message and a Zot6 message is that they use different delivery services. In the case of Zot6 and Nomad, these delivery systems support nomadic identity.
(*) ActivityStreams is a data serialisation protocol. ActivityPub and Nomad are message transfer protocols. Both of these are consumers of ActivityStreams formatted data. The most notable difference is that ActivityPub requires all identities to be DNS-based URLs. Nomad identities are cryptographically derived and are not permanently tied to any single DNS address.
After Mike left and handed over the Hubzilla project, the protocol (in the above sense, i.e. not the software implementation) of Hubzilla was and is Zot6.
It is probably also a fact that Nomad is possibly a completely different protocol (with regard to the technical specifications, which unfortunately cannot be found anywhere).
My current idea: I would leave it as it is for now, even if there might be a little confusion here and there about whether and how Nomad and Zot are connected. I think that's negligible.
if then
