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

Create SIP for transferrable assets #35

Closed
friedger opened this issue Sep 7, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed

Create SIP for transferrable assets #35

friedger opened this issue Sep 7, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@friedger
Copy link
Contributor

friedger commented Sep 7, 2021

There should a trait for digital assets that are transferable. The trait should work for the two native fungible and non-fungible assets. It should be some kind the smallest common denominator between NFTs (sip-9 like assets) and FTs (sip-10 like assets).

@friedger friedger changed the title Create SIP for NFTs that can be transferred with a memo Create SIP for transferrable assets Sep 7, 2021
@MarvinJanssen
Copy link
Collaborator

MarvinJanssen commented Sep 9, 2021

Here is another example where things are made more difficult by the incompatibility of SIP009 and SIP010.

https://github.com/MarvinJanssen/stx-atomic-swap/blob/master/stx/contracts/sip009-sip010-htlc.clar

Edit:

And a transferable-trait for reference.

(define-trait transferable-trait
	(
		(transfer (uint principal principal) (response bool uint))
	)
)

@friedger
Copy link
Contributor Author

friedger commented Sep 9, 2021

Native nfts and fts are incompatible by nature because the further are transferred by identifier, the latter by amount. However, for NFTs that use a uint as identifier, the same method signature for transfer can be used as FTs.

@MarvinJanssen
Copy link
Collaborator

Sure, but in the case of SIP009 and SIP010 the above used to work which is pretty powerful. It is not out of the ordinary to represent either an amount or a token ID in a single uint.

@friedger
Copy link
Contributor Author

friedger commented Dec 2, 2021

Closing this in favor of #52

@friedger friedger closed this as completed Dec 2, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants