Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65CE1F21 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 18:07:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B792B11C for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 18:07:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZVkXX-0004WZ-KM for bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:07:43 +0200 Received: from f052014226.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.52.14.226]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:07:43 +0200 Received: from andreas by f052014226.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:07:43 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org From: Andreas Schildbach Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:07:26 +0200 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: f052014226.adsl.alicedsl.de User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_ALL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] RFC - BIP: URI scheme for Blockchain exploration X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 18:07:47 -0000 On 08/29/2015 06:31 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 Good thinking! It might make sense to look at the existing de-facto standard (e.g. blockexplorer.com, blockchain.info): /tx/ for transactions /block/ for blocks, supports both hash or height /address/ for address