Author: Stefan Thomas 2012-03-03 13:44:45
Published on: 2012-03-03T13:44:45+00:00
The discussion revolves around whether to include JSON-RPC API calls as a part of BIPs, as several independent clients such as libcoin and BitcoinJS aim to implement these APIs. The proposed BIP aims to create a common protocol between different clients, miners, mining proxies, and pools. Standardization seems like a good idea since it affects a lot of software, and there seems to be no reason not to use the BIP process. However, the content of the BIP is yet to be commented upon since the thread is more of a meta-discussion.One participant in the discussion argues that the BIP process applies across bitcoin implementations and mainly focuses on generic use-cases and the protocol, which affect all clients and allow the system to function as a united whole. According to them, implementation-specific non-bitcoin-protocol proposals like this one are outside the mandate of the BIP process. They give an example of a hypothetical situation where multiple backends use Bitcoin-Qt, and they think a proposal to mandate a change in the UI placement or the abstraction layer of Bitcoin-Qt would not be appropriate BIP material. However, they acknowledge that the BIP process is correct for standardizing behaviors like URIs that are needed for interoperability of the network and community.
Updated on: 2023-06-06T03:30:39.452184+00:00