From: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
To: Marco Pontello <marcopon@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 17:16:37 -0400
Message-ID: <5546682.RnG4VcateO@crushinator>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.0.5-gentoo; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CAE0pAC+32rhWdBL+WbPANy0rd+eh-XsPQy-u3OHUxS0ku7eN-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAE0pACLMcMzHkA=vEx+fiEmq7FA1bXDc4t_hQ+955=r=62V5=g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDpC55dsr4GNAUabgnOeXcNTrgHSAtM7Jqfp0_QUfjXmoQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE0pAC+32rhWdBL+WbPANy0rd+eh-XsPQy-u3OHUxS0ku7eN-Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] RFC - BIP: URI scheme for Blockchain exploration
Precedence: list

Isn't this all backward? The "authority" component of the URL should id=
entify the chain, and the "path" component should identify the particul=
ar block, tx, or address in that chain.

So instead of:

blockchain://tx/ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2f24ecd39=
18f76c17f?chain=3D000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f=
1b60a8ce26f

It should be:

blockchain://000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a=
8ce26f/tx/ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2f24ecd3918f76c=
17f

And I would agree with allowing well-known chains to register a name, t=
o be used as an alternative to the literal, hash syntax:

blockchain://bitcoin/tx/ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2=
f24ecd3918f76c17f


On Tuesday, 1 September 2015, at 4:49 pm, Marco Pontello wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Jorge Tim=F3n <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>=20
> >
> > I would really prefer chain=3D<chainID> over network=3D<chainPetnam=
eStr>
> > By chainID I mean the hash of the genesis block, see
> >
> > https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commit/3191d5e8e75687a27cf466b7a4=
c70bdc04809d39
> > I'm completely fine with doing that using an optional parameter (fo=
r
> > backwards compatibility).
> >
>=20
> I see that using the genesis block hash would be the perfectly rigoro=
us way
> to do it, but what do you think about the possibility of letting also=
 use
> the name constants, as a simple / more relaxed alternative? That woul=
d
> spare a source lookup just to write a correct reference to a tx, mayb=
e in a
> forum or a post.
>=20
> So a reference to a certain tx could be either:
>=20
> blockchain://tx/ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2f24ecd=
3918f76c17f
>=20
> blockchain://tx/ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2f24ecd=
3918f76c17f?chain=3D000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b=
3f1b60a8ce26f
>=20
> blockchain://ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2f24ecd391=
8f76c17f?chain=3Dmain
>=20
> (or a different element name maybe)
>=20
> --=20
> Try the Online TrID File Identifier
> http://mark0.net/onlinetrid.aspx