I apologize, you are correct, I should not have used the word "real".
However, if you look at section 3 of the RFC, the first hierarchal level (which in http is used to describe hosts) can be any "authority", not necessarily a hostname. So, you could use tx, block, address, etc. as the authority for their paths. RicMoo Sent from my self-aware iPhone .·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸><(((º> Richard Moore ~ Founder Genetic Mistakes Software Inc. phone: (778) 882-6125 email: ric...@geneticmistakes.com www: http://GeneticMistakes.com > On Aug 29, 2015, at 1:19 PM, Matt Whitlock <b...@mattwhitlock.name> wrote: > > bitcoin:12345 *is* a "real" URI. It's just not an absolute, hierarchical URI > (a.k.a. a URL); rather, it's an opaque URI. > > And your suggestion is actually in violation of the URI spec, since > "blockhash", "txid", "block", and "address" are not host names. > > More correct would be: > > blockchain:?blockhash=00000000000000001003e880d500968d51157f210c632e08a652af3576600198 > blockchain:?txid=3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a > blockchain:?block=189000 > blockchain:?address=1RicMooMWxqKczuRCa5D2dnJaUEn9ZJyn > > You should read the URI syntax RFC: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986 > > >> On Saturday, 29 August 2015, at 12:31 pm, Richard Moore via bitcoin-dev >> wrote: >> I like the idea of having a standard for this, that all explorers (and even >> core, eventually) would understand. >> >> I would recommend 2 changes though. First, using a real URI scheme, >> blockchain:// so that we can just use normal URL parsing libraries. The >> bitcoin: thing leads to additional code to mutate it into a proper URI >> before passing it to URL parsing. And I think it would be fine to include >> the type looking up. For example: >> >> blockchain://blockhash/00000000000000001003e880d500968d51157f210c632e08a652af3576600198 >> blockchain://txid/3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a >> blockchain://block/189000 >> blockchain://address/1RicMooMWxqKczuRCa5D2dnJaUEn9ZJyn >> >> I think this would help the URI be more human understandable as well as give >> the explorers the ability to optimize a bit what they are looking for when >> hitting various databases. >> >> A possible future path could also include blockchain://tx/123000/4 for block >> height, tx index... Another possibility could be blockchain://version which >> would return a list of supported paths, version of the BIP supported, etc. >> >> The BIP should also specify little endian searching. I'm not sure, but would >> it also make sense for this BIP to include what the return results should >> look like? Maybe another, related BIP. >> >>> On Aug 29, 2015, at 7:48 AM, Marco Pontello via bitcoin-dev >>> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi! >>> My first post here, hope I'm following the right conventions. >>> I had this humble idea for a while, so I thought to go ahead and propose >>> it. >>> >>> BIP: XX >>> Title: URI scheme for Blockchain exploration >>> Author: Marco Pontello >>> Status: Draft >>> Type: Standards Track >>> Created: 29 August 2015 >>> >>> Abstract >>> ======== >>> This BIP propose a simple URI scheme for looking up blocks, transactions, >>> addresses on a Blockchain explorer. >>> >>> Motivation >>> ========== >>> The purpose of this URI scheme is to enable users to handle all the >>> requests for details about blocks, transactions, etc. with their preferred >>> tool (being that a web service or a local application). >>> >>> Currently a Bitcoin client usually point to an arbitrary blockchain >>> explorer when the user look for the details of a transaction (es. Bitcoin >>> Wallet use BitEasy, Mycelium or Electrum use Blockchain.info, etc.). >>> Other times resorting to cut&paste is needed. >>> The same happens with posts and messages that reference some particular >>> txs or blocks, if they provide links at all. >>> >>> Specification >>> ============= >>> The URI follow this simple form: >>> >>> blockchain: <hash/string> >>> >>> Examples: >>> >>> blockchain:00000000000000001003e880d500968d51157f210c632e08a652af3576600198 >>> blockchain:001949 >>> blockchain:3b95a766d7a99b87188d6875c8484cb2b310b78459b7816d4dfc3f0f7e04281a >>> >>> Rationale >>> ========= >>> I thought about using some more complex scheme, or adding qualifiers to >>> distinguish blocks from txs, but in the end I think that keeping it simple >>> should be practical enough. Blockchain explorers can apply the same >>> disambiguation rules they are already using to process the usual search >>> box. >>> >>> From the point of view of a wallet developer (or other tool that need to >>> show any kind of Blockchain references), using this scheme mean that he >>> can simply make it a blockchain: link and be done with it, without having >>> to worry about any specific Blockchain explorer or provide a means for the >>> user to select one. >>> >>> Blockchain explorers in turn will simply offer to handle the blockchain: >>> URI, the first time the user visit their website, or launch/install the >>> application, or even set themselves if there isn't already one. >>> >>> Users get the convenience of using always their preferred explorer, which >>> can be especially handy on mobile devices, where juggling with cut&paste >>> is far from ideal. > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
