Hi, I'm the author of this article, and the original author of the bidi routing library in Clojure.
Recently, I discovered RFC 6570 and think it's a great basis for a URI router, especially given its designed for creating links too, which is useful in the context of building htmx (and other hypermedia) apps.
That's cool - we've used bidi for years on lots of projects and have always just built our links w/ string concatenation. Formalizing this more makes a lot of sense.
With SPAs we've put a decent amount of thought into the tradeoffs between URI length, and putting enough context in each link to reconstitute the app state from a combination of local-storage, data requested from the server, and pure frontend db state (navigation location, parameters, etc...)
Perhaps there's some connection here as well with datafy/nav, there are increasingly spaces where REST-ish graphs of data are arising and capitalizing on the formalism in reference/navigation with something like this seems like a good idea too.
Some of our documents contain confidential details (personal data, client confidential details). Keybase provides a filesystem (kbfs), accessible by authorized individuals, with team management, and git repositories for recording history.
Crux is quite a different beast to Datomic, in that it is schema-less, designed to work with Kafka, bi-temporal and some other architectural differences. Similarities are that they are both built (mainly) in Clojure and support Datalog queries (albeit different dialects)
Disclosure: I work at JUXT but not directly on Crux
At JUXT we use Clojure's EDN, bolstered with some tag literals courtesy of our Aero library (described here: https://juxt.pro/blog/posts/aero.html). We use ClojureScript to compile to TF's JSON. EDN allows comments, ignores commas and otherwise is a nicer JSON. Aero allows us to encode multiple environments in a single document, and include ciphertext for secrets. We're pretty happy with the overall result.
Very well put. I think this is an extremely insightful summary of the state of ClojureScript for the web today. I feel I'm still waiting for another leap forward.
I haven't used Scala.js, but I find Clojure and ClojureScript to be so damn close to identical I'm surprised at this comment. When I'm doing ClojureScript, everything I use from syntax, sequences, persistent data structures, core.async, protocols and records (the list seems endless) is the same as Clojure. The only thing that trips me up is regular expressions. In fact, I find there's a great deal more difference in the Scala written by any given two Scala developers than between Clojure and ClojureScript.
