Author: Jonathan Underwood 2019-08-04 00:15:17
Published on: 2019-08-04T00:15:17+00:00
The email thread discusses the idea of having a prefix string in BIP174 and how it adds complexity to parser code. Some people are against the idea, while others argue that the benefit for the whole industry is greater if there is a conflict-avoidance prefix. The author suggests using a specific type for all (global, input, and output) in BIP174, which means "see the BIP numbered in the next byte." This would allow for a BIP43-ish system for BIP174. The author also mentions that POR COMMITMENT and their current signature protocol proposal should go in there. They will keep an eye on the bips repo and implement it if someone pings them once things settle down.
Updated on: 2023-06-13T20:36:09.119036+00:00