On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Michael Gronager <grona...@ceptacle.com> wrote: > * What if the SignedReceipt is not received AND the transactions IS posted on > the p2p.
I think this is a problem with confusing terminology rather then the spec itself. The original formulation had a receipt being something generated purely by the buyer. The signed Invoice message + the Bitcoin transactions paying to the outputs + the merkle branches showing acceptance by the network *is* the receipt. The SignedReceipt message is useful in the sense that it shows confirmation by the merchant, but if you don't get one, you can still prove you paid the invoice. So from this perspective perhaps SignedReceipt should be renamed to Acceptance or something like that, and then the spec should call out that a signed invoice plus accepted Bitcoin transactions is mathematically a proof of purchase. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
