Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Saw a few casts grumbling about the next iteration of frames Clearing up misconceptions: 1. We circulated earlier versions of the public draft with a dozen or teams who are actively building frames. 2. Existing frames will continue to work as is. If people continue to build them and they have meaningful usage, we will support them. 3. Our goal with the changes is to give developers *more* surface area to build better experiences and *more* reliability for one shot actions like transactions (still clunky today). 4. Frames are just links. So other clients can choose to adopt or not and they will start work. 5. Frames are Farcaster primitives not just Warpcast because they contain social context, e.g. a user’s FID
7 replies
150 recasts
433 reactions
Fucory
@fucory
Frames need to become fully composable credibly neutral microfrontends
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
They are composable today! What would you change about them?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Fucory
@fucory
I dmd you a long time ago about what I would change about them but i would make them microfrontends rather than a bespoke standard
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Fucory
@fucory
Happy to discuss with anybody on team who is at devcon. I chatted with ENS about it too and they seemed excited
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Fucory
@fucory
My tldr of "why" is everytime a team like worldcoin has built their own bespoke microapp solution it has been a failure of farcaster to capitalize on one of the biggest network effect opportunities farcaster has
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
