SIP-016 Metadata for Tokens #44

friedger · 2021-10-20T12:58:49Z

This PR

adds a sip for metadata of token, this includes NFTs that are compliant to SIP-009, FTs that are compliant to SIP-010, or semi-fungible tokens.
addresses Metadata for NFTs #17

friedger · 2021-10-20T12:59:49Z

I am looking for more real world examples like:

{
  "collection": "PoX Monks",
  "id": 1,
  "name": "PoX Monk 1",
  "image": "ipfs://ipfs/QmegB9FURt6Jz1kGbaQxNqhvoPk9G2b87rxUE1h9DLDbDF/PoX%20Monk%201.jpg",
  "attributes": [
    {
      "type": "body",
      "value": "buff monk"
    },
    {
      "type": "headwear",
      "value": "orange hat"
    }
  ]
}

Here we see additional properties: "collection" and "id", also "type" instead of "trait_type".

friedger · 2021-10-20T13:07:09Z

The SIP contains a JSON schema definition written in JSON.
Makers of $65m NFT "First 5000 days" by Beeple mixed schema definition with schema values. Metadata should NOT look like this. While valid according to the sip, providing values in "description" fields is counter-intuitive.

{"title": "EVERYDAYS: THE FIRST 5000 DAYS", 
"name": "EVERYDAYS: THE FIRST 5000 DAYS", 
"type": "object", 
"imageUrl": "https://ipfsgateway.makersplace.com/ipfs/QmZ15eQX8FPjfrtdX3QYbrhZxJpbLpvDpsgb2p3VEH8Bqq", 
"description": "I made a picture from start to finish every single day from May 1st, 2007 - January 7th, 2021.  This is every motherfucking one of those pictures.", "attributes": [{"trait_type": "Creator", "value": "beeple"}], 
"properties": 
   {"name": {"type": "string", "description": "EVERYDAYS: THE FIRST 5000 DAYS"}, 
    "description": {"type": "string", "description": "I made a picture from start to finish every single day from May 1st, 2007 - January 7th, 2021.  This is every motherfucking one of those pictures."}, 
    "preview_media_file": {"type": "string", "description": "https://ipfsgateway.makersplace.com/ipfs/QmZ15eQX8FPjfrtdX3QYbrhZxJpbLpvDpsgb2p3VEH8Bqq"}, 
    "preview_media_file_type": {"type": "string", "description": "jpg"}, "created_at": {"type": "datetime", "description": "2021-02-16T00:07:31.674688+00:00"}, "total_supply": {"type": "int", "description": 1}, 
    "digital_media_signature_type": {"type": "string", "description": "SHA-256"},
    "digital_media_signature": {"type": "string", "description": "6314b55cc6ff34f67a18e1ccc977234b803f7a5497b94f1f994ac9d1b896a017"}, 
     "raw_media_file": {"type": "string", "description": "https://ipfsgateway.makersplace.com/ipfs/QmXkxpwAHCtDXbbZHUwqtFucG1RMS6T87vi1CdvadfL7qA"}}}

friedger · 2021-10-20T13:08:23Z

Example with extensive use of properties. Here trait definitions (that can be defined in attributes) and properties are mixed into the "properties" value.

{
"name": "foo",
"image": "bar",
"properties": {
  "making_of_video": {
     "display_type":  "uri",
     "trait_type": "string",
     "value": "protocol://identifier"
  },
  "video_md": {
   "display_type": "none",
   "trait_type": "xml", // string???
   "value": " <xs:element name="VIDEOMD" type="videoType"/>
        <xs:element name="VIDEOSRC" type="videoType"/>
        <xs:annotation>
        <xs:documentation>VIDEOMD: LC-AV Video Metadata Extension Schema. VIDEOMD contains technical ...
 </xs:documentation>
        </xs:annotation>
        <xs:complexType name="videoType">
        <xs:annotation>
        <xs:documentation>A complexType for encapsulating and organizing within a singleparent element ...
</xs:documentation>
        </xs:annotation>
     ..."
    },
 }

mardi00 · 2021-10-20T17:00:14Z

Hoi Axopoa here. For most of the NFT collections where the "source" is "hosted", a format like this would (maybe) be ok.

{
  "name": "PoX Monks",
  "description": "A unique collection of monks",
  "author": "Monks Studio",
  "version": 1,
  "date": 1631645313396,
  "items": [
    {
      "id": 1,
      "name": "PoX Monk 1",
      "source": "ipfs://ipfs/QmegB9FURt6Jz1kGbaQxNqhvoPk9G2b87rxUE1h9DLDbDF/PoX%20Monk%201.jpg",
      "attributes": [
        {
          "type": "body",
          "value": "buff monk"
        },
        {
          "type": "headwear",
          "value": "orange hat"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 2,
      "name": "PoX Monk 2",
      "source": "ipfs://ipfs/QmegB9FURt6Jz1kGbaQxNqhvoPk9G2b87rxUE1h9DLDbDF/PoX%20Monk%201.jpg",
      "attributes": [
        {
          "type": "body",
          "value": "slim monk"
        },
        {
          "type": "headwear",
          "value": "blue hat"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}

Edit: Seems like I miss a lot of information. I will do my homework and come back

Jamil · 2021-10-21T04:13:17Z

For new collections, stxnft.com goes with a format that looks something like this:

{
  "collection": "StacksArmy",
  "name": "StacksArmy Captain #9",
  "image": "ipfs://ipfs/QmPPQBNKohiDYAnjKkdrQcf2LupqixFMEpyvnNWQXz7ozq/StacksArmy%20Captain%20%239.png",
  "attributes": [
    {
      "trait_type": "class",
      "value": "Captain"
    }
  ]
}

This is similar to the OpenSea metadata format, with the addition of the additional field collection.

This is because right now SIP-009 doesn't support "collection-level" metadata (ERC721Metadata for example, specifies name() and symbol() functions). I'm not terribly opinionated on whether this should be done at the contract level with an additional function to get the name/symbol, or whether it should be handled in get-token-uri as we do now.

To me, the OpenSea metadata format works just fine with this collection-level metadata caveat. I'd support either (a) an extension to SIP-009 allowing for NFT contracts to return a name and symbol (e.g., get-name and get-symbol functions which take no arguments), or (b) adopting a metadata format that is OpenSea + some field to specify the collection name.

sips/sip-x/sip-x-nft-metadata.md

friedger · 2021-10-23T11:35:41Z

Which properties should be required?
This sip proposed "version", "name" and "image"

friedger · 2021-10-23T14:46:29Z

@MarvinJanssen This SIP tries to specifies metadata for any type of tokens. It should be applicable also for SIP-013 tokens (#42). Does it make sense?

friedger · 2021-10-23T14:57:37Z

To me, the OpenSea metadata format works just fine with this collection-level metadata caveat. I'd support either (a) an extension to SIP-009 allowing for NFT contracts to return a name and symbol (e.g., get-name and get-symbol functions which take no arguments), or (b) adopting a metadata format that is OpenSea + some field to specify the collection name.

@Jamil I support b). I propose field "properties.collection".

MarvinJanssen · 2021-10-23T21:22:46Z

Thanks @friedger this is great. I think bringing in lots of real world examples makes sense (like you have been doing). We should tap into our friends in the EVM space and see what they are doing these days too. As long as there is a version field, mentioned in #42, then I think we can come up with anything.

Jamil · 2021-10-23T21:27:23Z

Which properties should be required?
This sip proposed "version", "name" and "image"

On stxnft.com right now we'll render any metadata as long as name and image are provided.

However, are we going to require tokens which represent non-image data (e.g., bns, quotes) to have a corresponding render/image?

It'd certainly make things easier on my side but I'm not sure people will follow that for non-image NFTs.

friedger · 2021-10-24T07:31:44Z

This sip is mainly about sip compatible contracts, not about native assets, like bns.

BNS needs a wrapper!

It would be great to specify an algorithm to display tokens without image like identicon.

Non-image NFTs would still need some kind of image to represent on a marketplace assuming users use the marketplace with their eyes. We need to think about accessibility!

dantrevino · 2021-10-25T14:07:16Z

For new collections, stxnft.com goes with a format that looks something like this:
{
  "collection": "StacksArmy",
  "name": "StacksArmy Captain #9",
  "image": "ipfs://ipfs/QmPPQBNKohiDYAnjKkdrQcf2LupqixFMEpyvnNWQXz7ozq/StacksArmy%20Captain%20%239.png",
  "attributes": [
    {
      "trait_type": "class",
      "value": "Captain"
    }
  ]
}
This is similar to the OpenSea metadata format, with the addition of the additional field collection.

This is because right now SIP-009 doesn't support "collection-level" metadata (ERC721Metadata for example, specifies name() and symbol() functions). I'm not terribly opinionated on whether this should be done at the contract level with an additional function to get the name/symbol, or whether it should be handled in get-token-uri as we do now.

To me, the OpenSea metadata format works just fine with this collection-level metadata caveat. I'd support either (a) an extension to SIP-009 allowing for NFT contracts to return a name and symbol (e.g., get-name and get-symbol functions which take no arguments), or (b) adopting a metadata format that is OpenSea + some field to specify the collection name.

The specification for metadata should apply to individual NFTs ... for collection data, that should be included in attributes. ie. a "collection" is not an nft. Ie for Boom NFTs the metadata would look something like this below.

{
  "name": "Foo #101",
  "image": "ipfs://somerandomecid",
  "attributes": [
    { "collection_name":  "Foo Collection" },
    { "collection_size":  "10000" },
  ],
  "properties": {
    "prop_1": {
      "prop_type": "string",
      "display_type": "string",
     "value": "foo",
    },
    "prop_2": {
      "prop_type": "number",
      "display_type": "number",
      "value": 99,
    },
  },
    "localization": {
      "uri": "ipfs://somerandomcid/{locale}.json",
      "default": "en",
      "locales": ["en", "ar-eg", "de"]
  }
}

Further I suggest:
name - required
image - required, can be blank
attributes: optional. Client may optionally display.
properties: optional. Client may optionally display.

if properties are included, they should be in the format { "key": "value" }, where "value" is an object with:
- prop_type - optional
- display_type - optional
- value - required
  localization - optional
if localization is included, it should follow the erc1155 metadata spec

friedger · 2021-11-03T21:08:19Z

@dantrevino properties and attributes should be swapped, shouldn't it? At least that is how opensea defines it: https://docs.opensea.io/docs/metadata-standards#metadata-structure

attributes consists of trait_type, display_type and value.

properties can be anything.

dantrevino · 2021-11-04T15:52:38Z

@dantrevino properties and attributes should be swapped, shouldn't it? At least that is how opensea defines it: https://docs.opensea.io/docs/metadata-standards#metadata-structure

attributes consists of trait_type, display_type and value.

properties can be anything.

yup got that backwards

sips/sip-x/sip-x-nft-metadata.md

friedger · 2022-04-22T13:59:29Z

@jcnelson The schema has been validated using JsonValidator. See https://github.com/Light-Labs/media-metadata-schemas
The found errors has been fixed.

jcnelson · 2022-05-16T17:56:35Z

Just checking in. Is there a mainnet contract using this trait yet?

jcnelson · 2022-06-08T19:25:44Z

@friedger Feel free to advance the status of this SIP to Activation-in-Progress, per my earlier comment. I can't commit directly to your PR since it's in your repo.

sips/sip-16/sip-016-token-metadata.md

Hero-Gamer · 2022-08-15T15:05:56Z

Hi all just wanna make sure this is captured officially.

During last Friday's weekly SIP call #79 (comment) I raised this point.

According to the activation criteria:
"This SIP is activated if 10 contracts are deployed that follows this
specification. This must happen before Bitcoin tip #750,000."

We are now at bitcoin block 749,565.
435 blocks left as of writing, which is approx. 3 days.

So I'm now working with the NFT marketplaces to fetch data to confirm 10 contracts have been deployed already.
Will update all how it goes.

dantrevino · 2022-08-15T19:47:59Z

There's a miss here @friedger ... this is not a contract sip, its a metadata sip. @Hero-Gamer there is no way to look at a contract and determine if the metadata supports sip-016. The contract only has a link to metadata, but, for instance, the boom-300 "contract" was deployed 10 months ago, before the sip was complete, and initially we created nfts that were not sip-016 compliant. However, now it is deploying nfts that are sip-016 compliant. Same contract.

https://explorer.stacks.co/txid/SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boom-nft-300?chain=mainnet

both minted from the same contract:
non-sip016 nft, created jan 17: https://bafkreie3abg3pp4573zkjmxcgaosifpyof5hi5gxelnqutnyhelihjqeqq.ipfs.nftstorage.link/
sip016 nft, created recently: https://bafkreicg63zfryk2cvrucztb5bztg4vh6hj2e65yxcr7nld2rtryobigcy.ipfs.nftstorage.link/

Jamil · 2022-08-15T19:55:07Z

Our Create Portal contracts are almost SIP-16 compliant but not quite, since we don't have the required "sip" field in the JSON. Working with our developers to add that for all future contracts, but not sure 10 contracts like this will be deployed by Wednesday. What is the process if this SIP does not meet the requirements by then, and we have to re-start?

dartman10 · 2022-08-15T20:07:20Z

I found these with "sip": 16 in metadata:

name	contract	metadata_url
Boombox [10th Edition]	SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boomboxes-cycle-32	https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafkreigzei42ktazjl3b6ounitwazbmcz7zzn5vb7poevx2xoroau7ftnm
Boombox [12th Edition] - Bloombox by Grace Hye	SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boomboxes-cycle-36	ipfs://bafkreidowklqh7nub2dxrh2mj4tu46inqtapqfidqnwk5taown5w4li6pq
Boombox [13th Edition]	SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boomboxes-cycle-38	ipfs://bafkreibduyxkdcp3djswzjjoexoi6hcvk2suaoyri2uqpiuyxbhkh6bwxe
Boombox [14th Edition] - STX of Toys	SPMS4E9RQ4GCGG68R6D15PKV01TYNCBPYZG1ZMFE.boomboxes-cycle-40	ipfs://bafkreieanobksr6qetgqupx7zpn2aebw742siwsqa4ef6i7aybxvnku2ze
Boombox [8th Edition] - Moonbox	SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boomboxes-cycle-28	https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafkreic3emy7vy4azvm56sy3dwsuny4653uzi7ubb36ui63w424kagzfym
Boombox [8th Edition] - Moonbox	SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boomboxes-cycle-28-moonbox	https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafkreic3emy7vy4azvm56sy3dwsuny4653uzi7ubb36ui63w424kagzfym
Boombox [9th Edition] - Mushroom by Flower	SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boomboxes-cycle-30	https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafkreibszx62vqkce7pefr6xtcqvyec7lo5xdjy6c7r3dhfd5bkl3wyvku

jcnelson · 2022-08-15T20:10:07Z

Technically yes, you would need to restart in general since it indicates that the SIP doesn't have enough interest. But it seems that in this specific case, the only reason this SIP hasn't activated was due to a bug in the implementation (e.g. a missing sip field in the JSON), but there is otherwise sufficient interest. In this case, it would be fine by me to just combine the whole "withdraw, re-submit, accept, recommend, activation-in-progress" sequence into simply the act of increasing the activation-in-progress block height to whatever you need (a week?). The effect is the same either way; the SIP text wouldn't be changing and the activation-in-progress section only needs the steering committee's sign-off (which right now is just me).

So yeah, go ahead and change the block height and keep everything else as-is.

friedger · 2022-08-16T05:22:42Z

Here is another one: https://explorer.stacks.co/txid/SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boom-nft-300?chain=mainnet Makes it 8.

dartman10 · 2022-08-17T10:58:06Z

No. 9 - a new one deployed a few hours ago:
SPQE8N8BHMT462W2XPK028GDM4RMQBSHAAY8D37G.crashpunks-punkettes
https://explorer.stacks.co/txid/0x95c03cb957324a9983430b4419c4d4180d13ca5b067cda7e23d314df4f762443?chain=mainnet
ipfs://QmcUiKLAeYbx78UZWoCuyKdm5GhZH6Jhto9yhKt1oPvWHY/

Hero-Gamer · 2022-08-17T14:42:50Z

153 bitcoin block time left, approx. 1 day. (current block time 749,847)
Who else/where else can we ask to find the last contract required?
almost there!

Jamil · 2022-08-17T14:44:17Z

The contract above (SPQE8N8BHMT462W2XPK028GDM4RMQBSHAAY8D37G.crashpunks-punkettes) was deployed with the Gamma Create Portal, which now has the sip field in the JSON.

The next contract deployed with the Gamma Portal will be the 10th :)

dartman10 · 2022-08-17T21:10:35Z

No. 10? This NFT has a dynamic metadata. The latest mint has a SIP-016 metadata, prior mints were not.

United States of Bitcoin
SP1JCPNPAMAQJ364AFHPTW3HY7X0HYZ3TJ0ZDGWZH.artificial-satoshi

Latest mint with "sip": 16 :

ipfs://QmcNwUgnJJ4W5SEpuZ3f4MVjky69RuoVm8rG3DRXvtLvzD/json/1.json
https://explorer.stacks.co/txid/0xd64cfe3e53b0d1291596b2bce6c613a168e8a9fd20d4fec7a4d6a6a9332abc61?chain=mainnet

Earlier mint example without "sip": 16:

ipfs://QmYi2633t2QRiWUwA5RpQ8QPEqbh8yAb5jSeLzd6D8WFZC/json/1.json
https://explorer.stacks.co/txid/0x819fae14fa1b0633e75ade07002f6df5017805615168ba7f9f89d38d25f05dec?chain=mainnet

Hero-Gamer · 2022-08-17T21:26:24Z

If all contracts checks out:
Current Bitcoin block height: 749,876
https://mempool.space/block/0000000000000000000894d96480628dcd38fd9424750e9d2638aa75233e19f0

jcnelson · 2022-08-22T01:44:30Z

Awesome to see! I will take a look as soon as I am able, and if it all checks out, it will be my pleasure and honor to advance this to Ratified 🎉

jcnelson · 2022-08-24T15:14:51Z

Here is another one: https://explorer.stacks.co/txid/SP1QK1AZ24R132C0D84EEQ8Y2JDHARDR58R72E1ZW.boom-nft-300?chain=mainnet Makes it 8.

@friedger I'm not sure where to look for the metadata URL here? This appears to be a contract deploy from 6 months ago.

The rest look good to me.

dartman10 · 2022-08-24T19:53:37Z

Perhaps Xan Ditkoff can help. :)

name	contract	metadata_url
Xan Ditkoff #1	SP2VG7S0R4Z8PYNYCAQ04HCBX1MH75VT11VXCWQ6G.the-built-on-bitcoin-podcast	ipfs://QmQBr6yGuiJmsWTmkYSbgkU1GX41BJpNB19mKNiLeFh3Lq/json/1.json
Xan Ditkoff #2	SP2VG7S0R4Z8PYNYCAQ04HCBX1MH75VT11VXCWQ6G.the-built-on-bitcoin-podcast	ipfs://QmQBr6yGuiJmsWTmkYSbgkU1GX41BJpNB19mKNiLeFh3Lq/json/2.json
Xan Ditkoff #3	SP2VG7S0R4Z8PYNYCAQ04HCBX1MH75VT11VXCWQ6G.the-built-on-bitcoin-podcast	ipfs://QmQBr6yGuiJmsWTmkYSbgkU1GX41BJpNB19mKNiLeFh3Lq/json/3.json
Xan Ditkoff #4	SP2VG7S0R4Z8PYNYCAQ04HCBX1MH75VT11VXCWQ6G.the-built-on-bitcoin-podcast	ipfs://QmQBr6yGuiJmsWTmkYSbgkU1GX41BJpNB19mKNiLeFh3Lq/json/4.json
Xan Ditkoff #5	SP2VG7S0R4Z8PYNYCAQ04HCBX1MH75VT11VXCWQ6G.the-built-on-bitcoin-podcast	ipfs://QmQBr6yGuiJmsWTmkYSbgkU1GX41BJpNB19mKNiLeFh3Lq/json/5.json
blobby	SP1CSHTKVHMMQJ7PRQRFYW6SB4QAW6SR3XY2F81PA.continuous-007	ipfs://QmRD1wKK6cMmfrgPBAzSR9LYj7ifKauETCEARJu1EpMZ9C/json/2.json

jcnelson · 2022-08-26T15:12:13Z

@dartman10 thanks! Looks good to me.

It is my pleasure to inform everyone that this SIP has met all of the criteria for ratification! Please transition this SIP to "Ratified" and I'll merge it 🎉

friedger · 2022-08-26T19:28:55Z

Great work everybody!

@jcnelson I changed the status to Ratified. Anything else to do?

jcnelson · 2022-08-26T19:30:56Z

Nope; going to merge

[WIP] initial draft

67cfed9

kyranjamie reviewed Oct 21, 2021

View reviewed changes

fix metadata spelling, add $schema, require 'version', 'name', 'image'

e0317e1

friedger added 3 commits October 23, 2021 16:02

add comment about length of string values

680f175

generalize for any metadata function

1cd310c

clarify activation rule, fix table

88114b2

friedger changed the title ~~[WIP] Metadata for NFTs~~ [WIP] Metadata for Tokens Oct 23, 2021

friedger added 2 commits October 23, 2021 16:50

add properties.id

ab2cb46

fix table

7fcd7ea

friedger added 2 commits October 23, 2021 17:30

improve attributes

5baa404

add properties section

0115927

friedger mentioned this pull request Nov 5, 2021

Metadata for NFTs #18

Closed

Update sip-x-nft-metadata.md

c53ec7b

friedger changed the title ~~[WIP] Metadata for Tokens~~ Metadata for Tokens Nov 7, 2021

friedger marked this pull request as ready for review November 7, 2021 14:49

Jamil reviewed Nov 8, 2021

View reviewed changes

sips/sip-x/sip-x-nft-metadata.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

sips/sip-x/sip-x-nft-metadata.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

sips/sip-x/sip-x-nft-metadata.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

sips/sip-x/sip-x-nft-metadata.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

friedger added 2 commits April 22, 2022 15:07

Update sip-016-token-metadata.md

2c22148

Update sip-016-token-metadata.md

347ad57

zone117x mentioned this pull request May 27, 2022

SIP-019: Notifications for Token Metadata Updates #72

Merged

rafaelcr mentioned this pull request Jun 7, 2022

NFT Metadata processing is not enabled on this server hirosystems/stacks-blockchain-api#1199

Closed

jcnelson added the Activation-in-Progress SIP is in the process of activating label Jun 9, 2022

Change status to Activation-in-Progress

7941a3c

rafaelcr mentioned this pull request Jun 28, 2022

Refactor the Token Metadata Processor into an independent service hirosystems/stacks-blockchain-api#1222

Closed

rafaelcr reviewed Jul 11, 2022

View reviewed changes

sips/sip-16/sip-016-token-metadata.md Show resolved Hide resolved

Move to Ratified

92b6526

jcnelson merged commit 7f10722 into stacksgov:main Aug 26, 2022

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

SIP-016 Metadata for Tokens #44

SIP-016 Metadata for Tokens #44

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

mardi00 commented Oct 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Jamil commented Oct 21, 2021 •

edited

Loading

friedger commented Oct 23, 2021

friedger commented Oct 23, 2021 •

edited

Loading

friedger commented Oct 23, 2021

MarvinJanssen commented Oct 23, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Jamil commented Oct 23, 2021

friedger commented Oct 24, 2021

dantrevino commented Oct 25, 2021 •

edited

Loading

friedger commented Nov 3, 2021

dantrevino commented Nov 4, 2021

friedger commented Apr 22, 2022

jcnelson commented May 16, 2022

jcnelson commented Jun 8, 2022

Hero-Gamer commented Aug 15, 2022

dantrevino commented Aug 15, 2022

Jamil commented Aug 15, 2022

dartman10 commented Aug 15, 2022

jcnelson commented Aug 15, 2022 •

edited

Loading

friedger commented Aug 16, 2022

dartman10 commented Aug 17, 2022

Hero-Gamer commented Aug 17, 2022

Jamil commented Aug 17, 2022

dartman10 commented Aug 17, 2022 •

edited

Loading

Hero-Gamer commented Aug 17, 2022

jcnelson commented Aug 22, 2022 •

edited

Loading

jcnelson commented Aug 24, 2022 •

edited

Loading

dartman10 commented Aug 24, 2022

jcnelson commented Aug 26, 2022

friedger commented Aug 26, 2022

jcnelson commented Aug 26, 2022

SIP-016 Metadata for Tokens #44

SIP-016 Metadata for Tokens #44

Conversation

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021 • edited Loading

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021 • edited Loading

mardi00 commented Oct 20, 2021 • edited Loading

Jamil commented Oct 21, 2021 • edited Loading

friedger commented Oct 23, 2021

friedger commented Oct 23, 2021 • edited Loading

friedger commented Oct 23, 2021

MarvinJanssen commented Oct 23, 2021 • edited Loading

Jamil commented Oct 23, 2021

friedger commented Oct 24, 2021

dantrevino commented Oct 25, 2021 • edited Loading

friedger commented Nov 3, 2021

dantrevino commented Nov 4, 2021

friedger commented Apr 22, 2022

jcnelson commented May 16, 2022

jcnelson commented Jun 8, 2022

Hero-Gamer commented Aug 15, 2022

dantrevino commented Aug 15, 2022

Jamil commented Aug 15, 2022

dartman10 commented Aug 15, 2022

jcnelson commented Aug 15, 2022 • edited Loading

friedger commented Aug 16, 2022

dartman10 commented Aug 17, 2022

Hero-Gamer commented Aug 17, 2022

Jamil commented Aug 17, 2022

dartman10 commented Aug 17, 2022 • edited Loading

Hero-Gamer commented Aug 17, 2022

jcnelson commented Aug 22, 2022 • edited Loading

jcnelson commented Aug 24, 2022 • edited Loading

dartman10 commented Aug 24, 2022

jcnelson commented Aug 26, 2022

friedger commented Aug 26, 2022

jcnelson commented Aug 26, 2022

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

friedger commented Oct 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

mardi00 commented Oct 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Jamil commented Oct 21, 2021 •

edited

Loading

friedger commented Oct 23, 2021 •

edited

Loading

MarvinJanssen commented Oct 23, 2021 •

edited

Loading

dantrevino commented Oct 25, 2021 •

edited

Loading

jcnelson commented Aug 15, 2022 •

edited

Loading

dartman10 commented Aug 17, 2022 •

edited

Loading

jcnelson commented Aug 22, 2022 •

edited

Loading

jcnelson commented Aug 24, 2022 •

edited

Loading