Why AT URIs are not valid under IETF RFC-3986, what the impact is, and some possible ways forward.
Blob AT-URIs - at:// pizza thoughts
mini-proposal for referencing atproto blobs in AT-URIs
AT Protocol Primer
What is the AT Protocol and why does it matter in the grand scheme of the web
Bringing back at://
I’d also like to voice a strong dissenting opinion: a separate URI scheme follows long-standing precedent, reduces cognitive overhead and software complexity by making the transport distinction explicit, and has less ambiguous error handling. I think this direction trades short-term convenience for long-term ambiguity. The transport models are incompatible, not variants of each other Public atproto records flow through a well-understood pipeline: repos export as CAR files, relays consume fireh...
AT Protocol Handler – Get this Extension for 🦊 Firefox (en-US)
Download AT Protocol Handler for Firefox. AT Protocol Handler This extension lets you handle and open at:// URLs seamlessly in your browser by listing compatible sites. Originally developed for Chrome, this version supports Firefox with full protocol handler integration.
AT Protocol Handler – Get this Extension for 🦊 Firefox (en-US)
Download AT Protocol Handler for Firefox. AT Protocol Handler This extension lets you handle and open at:// URLs seamlessly in your browser by listing compatible sites. Originally developed for Chrome, this version supports Firefox with full protocol handler integration.
Community Spaces on AT Protocol - at:// pizza thoughts
Scaled-down design patterns
Hey #atprotodev; should we make a convention for annotating HTML elements with the AT uris they’re built with? (So that, say, a browser extension could offer links to @pds.ls) Something like this? <li typeof="schema:Thing" resource="at://did:web:example.com/org.example.lexicon/rkey">
this is also a thing, but separate from the basic website stuff anna is talking about. the at:// potential is sort of about navigating to that sort of URI in browser bar. but I think more realistically, having anchor links. <a atref="at://..."> (or more realistically: data-atp="at://...")
Seriously mild take: ATProto web clients should serve a <link rel="alternate"> containing an at:// URI I've just opened a PR to do this on Frontpage and atproto-browser. I'd for other clients to follow along with the convention! github.com/likeandscribe/frontpage/pull/…
Add AT URIs as alternate links by tom-sherman · Pull Request #172 · likeandscribe/frontpage
github.comIf you're an #atprotodev I'd love your thoughts on this short proposal. I think we'd all benefit from a way to tag our HTML to reference the at:// uris they're derived from! @popfeed.social, @bookhive.buzz, @sifa.id, @leaflet.pub, @pckt.blog, @offprint.app and many more — penny for your thoughts?
Atproto markup for HTML
byjp.leaflet.pubWhat are you’re thoughts on making this breaking change more inclusive to any AT URI? Like for @semble.so it would be very useful to have this mapping or any webpage that has a corresponding AT record (e.g. microblogging, standard.site, steamplace videos）
I think this breaking change for standard.site needs to become an ecosystem-wide conversation and convention. Any web page that represents a corresponding AT record needs to include a meta tag that includes that record. <meta name=“at:uri” content=“at://…” \>
rich harris
atproto/@standard.site friends: any thoughts on this issue? This... <link rel="site.standard.publication" href="at://..."> ...is invalid HTML, per html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#the-…, because DIDs aren't hostnames. This causes problems with some tools. Issue here: github.com/sveltejs/kit/issues/15935
My take on "The AT-URI Syntax Mess": the canonical form should be percent-encoded, and today's colon syntax should stay as a defined lax input form. Longer writeup in the forum: discourse.atprotocol.community/t/the-at-uri-syntax-mess/934/…
The AT-URI Syntax Mess
discourse.atprotocol.community
bryan newbold
