A public profile that proves your credentials

Engineers, architects, surveyors, landscape architects, and geologists — single canonical schema across all of them.

Forgiving search on names, license numbers, regions, and disciplines via PostgreSQL pg_trgm.

/directory/:profession/:state/:slug — shareable, indexable, stable.

Only credentials confirmed by the issuing board show the verified badge.

Per-section public/private toggles; the professional decides what appears.

Draft enrichment from public sources; professional reviews and approves before publish.

Each profession gets its own visual treatment (gradients, icons, accent colors) so a PE profile reads differently from an architect profile.

A professional licensed in multiple states gets a unified profile that surfaces all their licenses with per-state verification status.

If a professional finds an unclaimed profile (e.g. one we built from board records), they can claim it through identity verification.

Optional showcase of project types (not document content) — categories, time spans, scale — for professionals who want a public portfolio.

A peer-attestation layer where verified professionals can endorse each other's specialty competence, audit-logged.

Programmatic verification: a client can hit an API to confirm a license before contracting.

A profile published without the professional's consent is a privacy violation, even if the underlying data is public.

Why we rejected it: just because state board records are technically public does not mean we should aggregate them into a polished profile without the professional's knowledge. We surface unclaimed profiles for claim, but the rich profile (bio, contact, sealing history) requires the professional's explicit opt-in.

A reviews layer on a licensed-professional directory invites defamation, reciprocal-rating games, and review-extortion patterns.

Why we rejected it: client satisfaction is real but ratings on licensed professionals — where one bad review can affect a career — is the wrong tool. We may add structured peer endorsements (verified-professional-to-verified-professional) but not open reviews.

The fact that someone sealed a document is professional record; the document itself is not.

Why we rejected it: public sealing history shows seal count, project type categories, and time spans — never the document, never the client, never identifying project metadata. Privacy of the underlying work is not negotiable.

A directory of people who never agreed to be in a directory is not a directory — it is a database we should not be building.

Why we rejected it: scraping board records and presenting them as EngineeringID profiles would create the appearance of partnership we do not have. Our directory is professionals who chose to be there. Other people's records belong to their issuing boards.