Recorded: May 19
Guests: Brooke (pckt.blog), Miguel (Offprint), Jared (Leaflet)
Let’s start with the individual stories, and we can move from oldest to newest.
Leaflet didn't start as an atproto blogging platform — you came in from a different direction and had to migrate. Walk us through what drove that decision, and what it cost. The migration kept old Leaflet records around to avoid breaking third-party tools. Who were those tools, and what did it feel like to have an ecosystem dependency pointing at your lexicons right when you were trying to move away from them?
Pckt is visually and philosophically different from Leaflet — it’s simpler, more minimal in some ways, but also a bit more playful. I sometimes think of pckt as the tumblr to Leaflet’s medium. Brooke — What were your goals building pckt initially
Miguel, Offprint is the newest of the three, launching after the standard was published. Was standard.site a precondition for Offprint existing, or did the product concept come first? What did building on a shared schema from day one give you that the others didn't have?
How did you all come together to create a standard lexicon for longform content? Was it awkward given that you're, at least in some sense, competing?
The fragmentation problem existed before standard.site — other lexicons, other platforms. Why did this coordination happen when it did? Was there a specific trigger, or was it the right people finding each other at the right moment?
Somebody had to send the first message, host the first call, write the first draft. Who did that work, and what would have happened if they hadn't?
Most coordination efforts like this have a moment where they nearly fall apart. Did this one?
How did three teams with different aesthetics and different stages actually agree on scope? What got proposed and cut?
The schema was intentionally minimal at launch. Knowing what you know now, would you have drawn the boundary in a different place?
The immutability constraint in Lexicon means no takebacks. Any regrets?
Right now standard.site has the informal authority of its founding platforms. What happens when a well-funded team joins and wants to push the schema somewhere the founders don't? Is there actually a plan for that?
RSS's biggest success story was a format it wasn't designed for — podcasts. Do you see an equivalent for standard.site? Is the schema genuinely format-agnostic, or is "document" more text-centric than it appears?
Standard.site solved the content container. Social interactions on top of that content — likes, comments, subscriptions — are still fragmented. Is that the next coordination problem, or is it a fundamentally harder one?