Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update EIP-6059: Clarify the backwards compatibility section #7261

Conversation

ThunderDeliverer
Copy link
Contributor

The backwards compatibility section was updated to further clarify the proposal's relationship to EIP-721.

The backwards compatibility section was updated to further clarify the
proposal's relationship to EIP-721.
@github-actions github-actions bot added c-update Modifies an existing proposal s-final This EIP is Final t-erc labels Jun 30, 2023
@eth-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

eth-bot commented Jun 30, 2023

File EIPS/eip-6059.md

Requires 2 more reviewers from @axic, @gcolvin, @lightclient, @Pandapip1, @SamWilsn

@eth-bot eth-bot added the e-consensus Waiting on editor consensus label Jun 30, 2023
@@ -450,6 +450,8 @@ This state change places the token in the pending array of the new parent token.

The Nestable token standard has been made compatible with [ERC-721](./eip-721.md) in order to take advantage of the robust tooling available for implementations of ERC-721 and to ensure compatibility with existing ERC-721 infrastructure.

The only incompatible part of the specification is the restriction to not use the token ID of 0.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm fine with this change, but would probably recommend something more specific, like:

Suggested change
The only incompatible part of the specification is the restriction to not use the token ID of 0.
The only incompatibility with ERC-721 is that Nestable tokens cannot use a token ID of 0.

@ThunderDeliverer
Copy link
Contributor Author

@SamWilsn thank you for your suggestion. As we had to open a new PR, we added the suggested rewording there and will close this one. The new PR is #7366

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
c-update Modifies an existing proposal e-consensus Waiting on editor consensus s-final This EIP is Final t-erc
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants