Okay so this is definitely an initial emotional reaction more than a strong Considered one,
but what's going on with this URL format?

<guid isPermalink="false">
at://did:plc:x4qyokjtdzgl7gmqhsw4ajqj/app.bsky.feed.post/3kh6noefhpq24
</guid>

@gaditb did: is an IRI format which specifies a resolver (plc?) and a resource key; at:// is a protocol which takes a DID and indicates that it should be accessed using the AT protocol and then that the path should be followed (side-note: IETF does not like the name at: but has no mechanism by which to disallow it)

so this is saying

Access [PLC DID] with AT and then access the [app.bsky.feed.post] collection and then access item [ID] within it

@Lady Yeah no that's the bizarre thing I mean.

The "app.bsky.feed.post" bit, based on its contents, sure looks like IT is the "where to go for the data you don't presently have".

Whereas a did:... is an opaque identifier. It davka DOESN'T point to any further info besides itself! What does "access [PLC DID]" even mean? Access it through WHAT? Where would there be anything interpreting to be an authority defining a "app.bsky.feed.post" collection?

@Lady (Oh right, IRI.)

Like how they are USING it is obvious. "contact the owners of the bsky.app URL and ask them for a post in a feed, specifically the feed of account did:plc:x4qyokjtdzgl7gmqhsw4ajqj , the item 3kh6noefhpq24 .

But that's... not the semantic meaning of what they put together into that IRI. What the heck is going on. What did they THINK they were doing.

@gaditb what they're semantically saying is "ask the account plc:… for this post they made on bsky.app"; it's to support account portability (if they ever get a PLC resolver which allows that??)