4 ms·

Can you clarify what the proposed change is? I don't quite follow. For example, what does `at://did:plc:fpruhuo22xkm5o7ttr2ktxdo/sh.tangled.feed.star/3m23ddgjpg

• 1718627440 1y ago
  https://did:plc:fpruhuo22xkm5o7ttr2ktxdo@/sh.tangled.feed.star/3m23ddgjpgn22 which then resolves to: https://did:plc:fpruhuo22xkm5o7ttr2ktxdo@morel.us-east.host.bsky.network/sh.tangled.feed.star/3m23ddgjpgn22 There might be conflicts there with a specification of passwords, so you need to use another separator than :.
  • danabramov 1y ago
    That's not a valid HTTPs URL though, is it? Since there's no specific location to hit. Maybe I'm missing something.
    • 1718627440 1y ago
      Then i did not understand the article, I thought morel.us-east.host.bsky.network was the specific location after resolving the DID.
      • danabramov 1y ago
        No, I mean that ` https://did:plc:fpruhuo22xkm5o7ttr2ktxdo@/sh.tangled.feed.star/3m23ddgjpgn22 ` (that's your proposal?) isn't a valid URI for https:// scheme. The need for the new scheme comes from being unable to express an identity-rooted URI in other schemes.
        • 1718627440 1y ago
          Yes, you need to make the part after @ optional, that already exists for other protocols like email. That's why it's still simpler than creating a new scheme from scratch. As far as I understood it it's still JSON over HTTP(S), so then why not use the scheme for that.
  • verdverm 1y ago
    If you put the data host in the URL, what happens to existing links if I move to a new PDS? the at:// is effectively content addressing, using the DID as the pseudo-host allows for (1) changing handle (2) changing PDS Your example does not look like a valid URL to me