Scott, I don't think I'd replied to you for some reason, but I think I'm generally in the same boat as you. While I prefer to have one Swiss Army knife-like tool that can do everything, I know that it just isn't going to happen, or at least it certainly isn't quite there yet. I use Twitter and Facebook for different things (primarily audience based), so I suppose I shouldn't expect to have my own site do exactly everything I want it to.

Part of the problem is that I don't have the skills, the time, or maybe even the patience to make my own site do everything I'd like it to (and if I did maintenance can be a bear), so sometimes picking up pieces of things here and there from other developers or even on other platforms seems to be the result. In some sense that's why I'm using both Known and WordPress simultaneously (along with a few other side projects which don't fit into either of those). WordPress does a lot of what I'd like, but the speed, simplicity, and ease-of-use that Known provides just couldn't be overlooked to give me more of what I wanted. Over time, I do find myself moving more and more under the WordPress banner, but I always hear the siren song of other tools calling, so it may never be under one umbrella.

I also find that using other tools lets me test drive UX, UI, and general functionality to see if it's something worth building, maintaining, or having myself. And even then, I like to do "manual until it hurts" to raise the bar a bit further.

I'm using a relatively standard WordPress set up with a handful of relatively standard "alternate" feeds advertised in my site <header>, but Feedly doesn't seem to be discovering them. I'd set it up in December (discussion here: http://boffosocko.com/2016/12/18/rss-feeds-a-follow-up-on-my-indieweb-commitment-2017/ ) and I recall Feedly found the alternate feeds at the time. Has Feedly changed the way it finds alternate feeds?

If it helps to troubleshoot, my site is at http://www.boffosocko.com. And at the moment Feedly seems to only find the first (and canonical WordPress) feed, but none of the other half a dozen or so which are primarily defined to create subsets of the original RSS feed based on categories or tags using typical WordPress methods. (Kudos by the way on apparently getting rid of the bug that defaulted to finding WordPress comments feeds first instead of the primary feed.)

For some reason, the old Feedly bookmarklet I use (is this still supported as I don't see it on the feedly site anymore) will work for most sites to add fees, but doesn't redirect properly to add mine instead the url indicates that it finds my json/oembed alternate link:
https://feedly.com/i/subscription/feed/http://boffosocko.com/wp-json/oembed/1.0/embed?url=http%3A%2F%2Fboffosocko.com%2F&format=xml
and then reports that no feed was found.

Using my direct URL in Feedly.com search appears to work as does the chrome Feedly mini, though they both only seem to find the primary feed and none of the other alternates as I would expect?

Thanks in advance for any hints or advice to fix this!

@philipcball @QuantaMagazine You don't happen to be covering the workshop at ASU this week? https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2017/01/23/quantifying-biological-complexity/

@pfefferle And there in a small nutshell is both the power and the drawback of part of the movement, particularly on a platform that powers 25% of the internet. I'm in the same boat with you (though my coding skills are far behind), but I thought I'd write down the blue sky idea as a potential target for the future. Perhaps we should follow Manton Reece's lead and create a Kickstarter campaign to fund such a thing? (_Said in half-jest/half-seriousness_).

I suppose the thing to continue focusing on is steady improvement of what already exists. Eventually a group of developers will join us all and separately or together we'll have the free time to bundle it all up the way we all imagine it sould be done on a salaried basis.

If I (or we, speaking on behalf of the rest of the community) don't say it often enough, **THANK YOU** again @pfefferle and @dshanske for your heroic efforts on behalf of the IndieWeb within WordPress.

Still haven't found the solution, but I'm thinking it may be as a result of encoding on mySQL database. Cross reference https://wordpress.org/support/topic/wordpress-chokes-on-turkey-emoji-for-thanksgiving/

Closing for now...

I think the biggest hurdle to wider adoption is simply the fact that there are so many individual plugins and this takes up far more mental space for the user than it should.

So, another option which I'd like to suggest and advocate for is to **bundle all the plugins into one big single plugin** instead of sub-plugins. You could almost sell it as "the part of WordPress core you always wished you had" and now you can with two clicks: download and activate. (That's got to sound good, even to your mom who's still figuring out how to upload her profile picture.)

From the user's standpoint, this wouldn't require much more than some slightly better UI/descriptions. (And I'm more than happy to write them.) This could consist of a single main settings page with on/off toggles for Post Kinds, Syndication Links, Webactions(?), Micropub, Hum, and IndieAuth. A tabbed interface on this same page with tabs primarily for settings/set up and usage description for all of these (except for maybe Webactions?) would complete the cycle.

Most of the sub plugins don't have many (if any) actual settings other than installation/activation right now which is creating the biggest part of the (mostly mental) hurdle for every day users. I think the average WordPress user probably wouldn't know that they had Webmentions, Semantic Linkbacks, or Webmentions for Threaded Comments installed because they "just work", require no configuration, but are far prettier than any of their predecessors. Why make them carry the mental overhead of what they are and what they do aside from a few subtle lines that they exist? In fact, treating them as if they should have been in WordPress core all along may actually make it more likely to happen.

Additionally things like Micropub which would only have an on/off toggle wouldn't be noticed or used by many unless they had interest in alternate posting interfaces. (And based on the popularity and growth in Twitter interfaces/apps a few years ago, I'm surprised WordPress didn't do this, though perhaps it's part of the reason they're adding a more robust API over the past few years?)

It also means having slightly better or more intuitive explanations of what the individual pieces are (mostly Syndication Links and Post Kinds) near their on/off toggles to better explain what is being activated. Much of this can be taken from the current interface or from the WordPress wiki pages, or added on the individual tabs for the settings for these portions.

I would suggest that doing this would not only make it easier on end users who then wouldn't have to spend the mental space and capacity to keep track of what 10 individual plugins are doing (in addition to the space these take up on the plugin admin page and the fact that, once activated, they disappear from the IndieWeb plugin's list of plugins), but that it would actually dramatically increase the uptake of the single big plugin and its functionality and simultaneously the use of the all the sub plugins individually.

I'd argue that bigger plugins like Yoast SEO or something like PressForward have huge numbers of options and settings and could have been done as separate sub-plugins (the way IndieWeb Plugin is now), but that their value proposition is such that it's well worth spending the handful of minutes reading through the interface to know what the options are, what they mean, and using them to their fullest advantage. I think that Indieweb (and the suite of tools offered on WordPress) is at this tipping point in terms of offering must-have functionality for the future web and that having a simpler integrated set up would help to push it over the edge to broader adoption. (Certainly simpler than the old WP-Social, which users have indicated that they thought was far simpler than Indieweb plugin, though Social actually required more set up.) Additionally all of the seemingly dense text in the "getting started" page could be moved into smaller bit-sized chunks relating to individual portions on a tabbed-interface, for example.

I come to this in part after having spent part of the weekend revamping a bit of the IndieWeb.org documentation on getting started with WordPress and setting up Bridgy with WordPress. A lot of the description is "get this plugin, install, and activate" which takes up a big piece of mental space for the user as well--particularly for the Gen2, 3, 4 users who want a plug and play experience. Far better would be to install one plugin and then modify these handful of settings.

If this is done, then the only remaining (small) hurdle is making sure that the underpinning rel-me data input required of the user is done in a more explicit manner, because this seems to be the lynch-pin holding a lot of it together and making it work. As a result, I'd recommend unbundling the reliance on the User Profile page and put all the rel-me URL fields on their own page in the settings interface for such a single plugin (with all important links just underneath them to encourage users to visit, for example, Twitter's edit profile page to include their website URL in either the website field or in the bio field to enable the bi-directional rel-me.)

Finally a "Tools" tab in the settings page could provide pointer links to additional things like the H-Card Widget or the IndieWeb-PressThis bookmarklets.

When all of this is done, it could also be a simple manner of adding another settings tab to the interface to set up Bridgy with one button links from the plugin to the set up pages for each of the main backfeed services there. Bridgy then automatically checks for the webmention endpoint and checks for rel-me to do it's work, so that part is already automated and relatively user friendly too.

The one caveat I can imagine is that making it all into one big plugin potentially means some small added overhead in development with maintaining some of them as stand alone pieces. I'd recommend keeping them as standalone objects as I honestly believe that pieces like webmentions and micropub are so fundamental to the web, that they should be part of WordPress core and maintaining them separately could help speed this along.

@megarush1024 If you have a moment, could you add yourself to https://indieweb.org/WordPress/Examples?

@keithjgrant That's a well worded synopsis. Welcome to the IndieWeb!

I'm curious if, as a CSS expert--which I am assuredly not, your book has a section that differentiates "semantic" and "styling" classes? One of the quirks I've run into while playing in the Indieweb is that some designers use microformat classes (like hentry/h-entry, e-content, etc.) to style their pages rather than simply allowing them to be used for semantic mark up and instead relying on secondary classes for styling. I've seen many instances, particularly within the WordPress and Drupal communities, where themes (including heavily used template themes--_s, I'm looking at you!) rely on styling using microformats or other semantic classes and this tends to cause problems with decentralization to opening up the web to movements like Indieweb. I have a feeling if more developers were educated about this "quirk" that large swaths of the internet (WordPress apparently runs 25% of the web) would be more easily/automatically converted/upgraded to support the decentralized web. Thoughts?

Glenn, Congratulations too on your new IndieWeb enabled WordPress site! Looking good. Let us know if you need any help. http://indieweb.org/WordPress