The core difference between blossom and NIP-96 is the focus on re-uploading files
If we want censorship resistant media then we need to be able to re-uploaded the files to other servers. similar to now nostr events get spread around the network
NIP-96 could support re-uploading files but it isn't currently part of the nip
There is also the difference that NIP-96 has a "/.well-known/nostr/nip96.json" file and customizable endpoints. In my view this is not a feature and makes it much more difficult to work with servers since clients must first fetch a map of the endpoints before they can talk to the server.
Blossom however requires blobs be served from the root of the domain ( example.com/.ext ) while this isn't very friendly to server admins it makes things very simple and easy to understand.
Also searching for a missing blob is a simple as replacing the domain. something a user could easily do ( and understand ) in the browser address bar
There are more smaller differences but in my view these are the major ones
server admins who can't make subdomains or rewrites are not very competent
but why does blossom not allow a path prefix?
Please Login to reply.
Simplicity, once you allow customizable paths then you need a document outlining it.
It also has the benefit that non-technical users can easily understand and manipulate the URL
and anyway like i say it's really not difficult to do that with http anyhow
