wait so. the DID spec (directly in v1.0 and indirectly though the CID (not that CID) spec) says that the id field in a service entry needs to be a compliant URI (not URI reference) but ... doesnt that mean that the "#atproto_pds" id thats all over most atmosphere DID docs is invalid ...
Aug 19, 2026 at 4:49 PM
[Proposal] AT-URI for cross-service records
tl;dr non-AtprotoPersonalDataServer services might host records, let’s introduce following AT-URI syntax with optional service field to reference those non-PDS hosted data. at://tangled_knot@did:plc:user/... ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ | path can be any format | (NSID/rkey prefered, but not enforced) service name (default to "atproto_pds" when omited) In this proposal, I’m going to explain why we need cross-service reco...
CIDs: What You Need to Know and Why, Part 2 - Nick's Blog
How ATProtocol uses Content Identifiers to create a versioned, verifiable, and portable data model.
Creating a did-method-web Identity for ATProtocol
Creating a did-method-web Identity for ATProtocol posted by @smokesignal.events on 2025-08-18 14:00 UTC
Creating a did:web identity in ATProto — Kamin's Corner
In the process of migrating my self-hosted PDS to a new server, I managed to accidentally lose my .env file and in the process lost by ro...
com.atproto.repo.createRecord | Bluesky
*This endpoint is part of the atproto PDS repository management APIs. Requests usually require authentication (unlike the `com.atproto.sync.*` endpoints), and are made directly to the user's own PDS instance.*
com.atproto.repo.listRecords | Bluesky
*This endpoint is part of the atproto PDS repository management APIs. Requests usually require authentication (unlike the `com.atproto.sync.*` endpoints), and are made directly to the user's own PDS instance.*
Embracing ATProto, part 1: Setting up a PDS
In this series of posts, I'll explore my journey into setting up my workflows and services for atproto. The first step is setting up my PDS. Let's start with a bit of explanation for all this lingo.
this is kinda another reason im starting to think more and more that there would be worth in splitting atprotos identity layer out as its own spec and standard. building up handles and oauth around a DID makes for a really flexible cross platform (and potentially cross ecosystem) identity system
Nelind
i kinda hate how atproto adopting DIDs has made people intrinsically associate DIDs with atproto ... it makes some people see me as some annoying bitch trying to shove atproto into places it obviously doesnt belong in when i suggest using DIDs as user identifiers for other systems
My "Introduction to #ATProto" blog post that I've been working on for some time is ready 🙂 It goes through things like records, lexicons, DIDs, then PDS/AppView etc. and how it all works together. Let me know if anything is wrong! More parts later, with the Fedi comparisons & misconceptions etc.
Introduction to AT Protocol
mackuba.eu@dholms.at and I pushed up IETF draft text for atproto repos and sync: ietf.org/archive/id/draft-holmgren-at-… ietf.org/archive/id/draft-holmgren-at-… these are versioned in github (per norm) over here: github.com/ietf-wg-atp/drafts
Yep. This is what is missing in the ATProto vision. The lexicons should've been a like schema.org instead of domain name-based. Everyone who wants to improve it can discuss it, similar to, well, schema.org. The frontend must be separate from the content. It's beneficial in many ways.
jack
we have standard.site but wen standard.pics? rn I’m juggling between @grain.social, @flashes.blue & @sprk.so for image sharing 😭
AT Status
Status pages related to atproto services
Teal.fm Status
Comail Status
Atmosphere Weather Report by MallDAO
Status
Status
Bluesky Debug
