CIP-0107? | URI Scheme - Block and transaction objects #635
Conversation
This CIP extends CIP-0013 with two new authorities, and enabling a simple and canonical reference to 5 new objects or locations on the Cardano blockchain
rphair
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Quantumplation I am really happy to see this presented, especially with concurrent discussion of #625 highlighting that objects should be possible to reference independently of query providers (cc @klntsky).
|
@Quantumplation on agenda for quick Triage assessment in next CIP meeting on 12 December, if you can make it (this is our last CIP meeting for 4 weeks): https://hackmd.io/@cip-editors/78 |
Co-authored-by: Robert Phair <rphair@cosd.com>
|
@rphair I am planning on being there for the CIP-0100 approval as well :) |
Co-authored-by: Adam Dean <63186174+Crypto2099@users.noreply.github.com>
rphair
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Quantumplation you are all set to rename the directory to CIP-0107 and update your "Rendered" link accordingly 🎉 ...
|
Done and Done. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Quantumplation given that a new span of URI protocols + a containing CPS (#841) are now moving ahead together, I would happily approve & merge this as soon as we settle the question about whether & how the ?height= query is used as per currently unresolved discussions:
#635 (comment)
#635 (comment)
I would prefer a consensus to keep height= in the syntax, despite its lack of cryptographic certainty, since I believe it would likely be a popular choice when this URI syntax becomes more generally adopted.
Specifically, I would not want to be the one to be explain to members of the public why they couldn't use it (in historical and/or governance contexts as I argued for in #635 (comment)) when it is meaningful for a far greater time span (in hindsight, forever) than its period of uncertainty (contemporary with its creation).
In any case as soon as there is a consensus about height=, and the CIP is updated according to that consensus, I'm ready to approve this. Adding to CIP meeting 9 days from now (https://hackmd.io/@cip-editors/91) to make sure this is progressed & maybe even merge if the way is cleared in the ensuring discussion here. cc @Crypto2099
CIP-0107/README.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| Examples: | ||
| ``` | ||
| web+cardano://block/c6a8976125193dfae11551c5e80a217403d953c08ebbd69bba904d990854011f |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(1 of 2) If height= is preserved in the query part of the URI syntax documented below, an example should be added here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
p.s. should be considered along with @Crypto2099's #635 (comment).
|
|
||
| ``` | ||
| blockref = "//block" query | ||
| query = ( "?block=" block_hash | "?height=" block_height) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(2 of 2) If height= is eliminated due to reservations about immutability (as per the previous & current discussion), it should be removed here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Quantumplation revisiting this CIP was favourable at the editors' meeting tonight & we're looking forward to merging as soon as @Crypto2099 commits final adjustments including resolving the dialogue above (I'm ready to approve it after those update(s)).
|
Per last meeting (# 91), expecting some final updates to this PR & likely merge by next meeting, so marking |
rphair
added
the
Last Check
|
In the pull request, it is probably a good idea to update the reference to this proposal within CIP-100 - here. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am happy to see this one FINALLY get merged if @Quantumplation can take a quick glance at the last outstanding/remaining issues (examples and minor cross-linking suggestions).
Co-authored-by: Ryan <44342099+Ryun1@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Adam Dean <63186174+Crypto2099@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@Crypto2099 I just applied the two suggestions; were there others you were thinking of? I haven't been able to keep up with this super well. |
Looks like everything outstanding/pending has been resolved so I think this one is ready to merge IMO @Ryun1 @rphair |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @Crypto2099 @Quantumplation for pushing this one through. 👏
This CIP extends CIP-0013 with two new authorities, and enabling a simple and canonical reference to 5 new objects or locations on the Cardano blockchain.
In particular, this will be useful in CIP-100, where we want to allow users to make references to on-chain transactions, blocks, and metadata, or store the transaction metadata within the same transaction.
Rendered