Post

mirroring existing catalog records (books, films, venues, etc) in to atproto records is tempting, but (IMHO) an anti-pattern. instead of copying that data in and referencing with an AT-URI, you should reference them by existing identifiers (ISBN, OSM identifier, etc). appviews sync the catalog.

Big fan of this. It's what I did with Lichess puzzles. Used their IDs and referenced them in the record while also providing a XRPC endpoint for them. xrpc-puzzles.wafflehouse.dev/xrpc/org.lic...

what about things like ontologies? if every CURIE was eventually stored on atproto as an immutable record, in a repo owned by a consortium that oversees the ontology, wouldn't you want to be able to reference the AT-URI, and the record has the existing identifier in there?

bc some ontologies do have identifiers that will never change and that happen to be https URLs, actually. but that should be fine. the ID is just an ID (for indexing), and the AT-URI could become canonically used to refer to the record on the protocol.

public broadcast and permission spaces deserve different sync mechanisms (and probably URI schemes). public into a global shared heap is sort of a special-case audience/scope. but it is important and different enough that the MST+firehose are worth it. all the other affordances+tooling is reused!

curious why it's called permissioned spaces rather than permissioned data?

I've changed my mind and there probably should be a generic/fallback profile record type for atmosphere accounts. something like gravatar.

thoughts on making once-permissioned data public? we’re setting up to need to do this pretty much constantly iameli.leaflet.pub/3mprgzkytjs2c it’s that or publish the same records twice inside and outside the space