I can always link to the BIP when I reopen that commit as independent instead of the other way around. Btw, the PR needs rebase (probably the conflict is in the README).
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Marco Pontello <marco...@gmail.com> wrote: > OK, adding the relevant code fragment is probably the simplest and direct > option. Done. > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Jorge Timón <jti...@jtimon.cc> wrote: >> >> Not a native english speaker myself, so I may have missed some things... >> >> Yes, sorry about the link. I guess you can point to #6230 . I can >> rebase it if needed but I would close it again because I don't want to >> have too many things from #6382 opened at the same time (is noisy and >> worse for review). My plan was to not open it independently at least >> until after #6907 (and actually after 0.12 assuming #6907 gets in by >> 0.12). But then I would maybe open a new one and reference the old one >> rather than reopening #6230 (which tends to be confusing). >> I'm not really sure what's the best answer here...but #6382 is >> certainly going to need rebase and the link will be broken again. >> Maybe one answer is to copy some text from #6230 or the commit and add >> it directly to the BIP instead of referencing to that commit (which >> will be, at least until #6907 is merged, a moving target). >> >> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Marco Pontello <marco...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Thanks for the comments! Now I fixed the typos (hope to have got them >> > all, >> > English isn't my first language), clarified the chain part a bit, and >> > fixed >> > the link. There probably is a better way to reference that source code >> > part >> > with the genesis blocks hashs, in a way that doesn't need to be changed, >> > maybe... >> > >> > Now the main change would be to put in a proper BIP number! :) >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Jorge Timón <jti...@jtimon.cc> wrote: >> >> >> >> Thank you for incorporating the feedback, specifically thank you for >> >> using the genesis block hash as the unique chain ID. >> >> >> >> I wen't through the BIP draft and left a few of comments, but I really >> >> like its simplicity and focus. Good work! >> >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 3:14 AM, Marco Pontello via bitcoin-dev >> >> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> >> > Hi! >> >> > >> >> > To anyone that followed the discussion (from some time ago) about the >> >> > proposed new URI for Blockchain references / exploration, I just >> >> > wanted >> >> > to >> >> > point out that I have collected the feedback provided, reworked the >> >> > text, >> >> > put the BIP on GitHub and created a pull request: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > https://github.com/MarcoPon/bips/blob/master/bip-MarcoPon-01.mediawiki >> >> > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/202 >> >> > >> >> > The need for an URI for this come to mind again in the last days >> >> > looking >> >> > at >> >> > Eternity Wall, which IMHO provide a use case that we will see more >> >> > and >> >> > more >> >> > in the (near) future: http://eternitywall.it/ >> >> > Using that service, when you want to check for the proof that a >> >> > specific >> >> > message was written in the Blockchain, it let you choose from 5 >> >> > different >> >> > explorer. >> >> > Mycelium wallet recently added the option to select one of 15 block >> >> > explorers. >> >> > And there's the crypto_bot on reddit/r/bitcoin that detect reference >> >> > to >> >> > transaction an add a message with links to 7 different explorers. >> >> > >> >> > I think that's clearly something that's needed. >> >> > >> >> > Bye! >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Marco Pontello <marco...@gmail.com> >> >> > 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. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Try the Online TrID File Identifier >> >> > http://mark0.net/onlinetrid.aspx >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > bitcoin-dev mailing list >> >> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> >> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Try the Online TrID File Identifier >> > http://mark0.net/onlinetrid.aspx > > > > > -- > Try the Online TrID File Identifier > http://mark0.net/onlinetrid.aspx _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
