Hypercerts currently presents two analytically important layers: a newer ATProto-based data protocol and older documentation from the ERC-1155 / onchain-certificate phase.
That transition is itself important, because it shows the project moving from token-first impact certificates toward a portable data / evaluation / funding-context graph.
The current docs repeatedly say tokenization is planned but not yet implemented, so older token-centric descriptions should be treated as historical context rather than the whole present-tense protocol.
Best current high-level explainer for the living record of impact work framing and the distinction between claims, measurements, evaluations, and funding use.
Best source reviewed for the record graph itself: activity claims, attachments, measurements, evaluations, contributor records, collections, and strong references.
Most important source for current funding semantics: receipts, acknowledgements, facilitator role, optional future tokenization, and the claim that Hypercerts records funding without prescribing one payment rail.
Historical docs that explicitly describe Hypercerts as an ERC-1155 semi-fungible token with IPFS metadata, useful for tracing the protocol’s design evolution.
Key takeaways captured for corpus
Hypercerts is now better categorized as a portable impact-data and funding-context protocol than as a pure token standard.
The core mechanism is a living graph of claims, evidence, measurements, evaluations, and funding receipts that can be created on different servers and recombined by indexers.
Practical authority sits partly with evaluators, relays, indexers, rights-definition records, and funding facilitators, not only with eventual onchain token wrappers.
The shift from wallet-required issuance toward ATProto data portability is a first-order design change, not a small implementation detail.