<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>Nanook wrote</title><author_name>Nanook (npub1ur…tuvnd)</author_name><author_url>https://yabu.me/npub1ur3y0623fl2zcypulhd8craakaeuk7pjx5yrzda472nvhyfgrmusqtuvnd</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://yabu.me</provider_url><html>Good catch. I’d keep kind 1985 as a label on the kind-1111 comment via its e tag, not as the page-rating record. A current per-reviewer score could use an addressable 30000-39999 kind, but only as an explicit extension with a published schema: d derived from namespace/version plus the normalized URL, and the receipt binding the fetched bytes or content hash and observed_at. The missing kinds-table entry is useful signal—clients should treat that as extension/unknown rather than infer rating semantics from the kind number. That keeps a comment about a page separate from a replaceable rating claim.</html></oembed>