Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bluematt.me
	designates 173.246.101.161 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=173.246.101.161;
	envelope-from=bitcoin-list@bluematt.me; helo=mail.bluematt.me; 
From: Matt Corallo <bitcoin-list@bluematt.me>
To: bitcoin-development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJAyNR7+=Dht4uLVjJ5DLLwhyG2aTDuFonu0ABXXCUVBKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1328020046.70720.YahooMailNeo@web121002.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<1328025899.2832.5.camel@BMThinkPad.lan.bluematt.me>
	<1328034145.2832.11.camel@BMThinkPad.lan.bluematt.me>
	<CA+s+GJAyNR7+=Dht4uLVjJ5DLLwhyG2aTDuFonu0ABXXCUVBKA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 16:42:48 -0500
Message-ID: <1328046168.2891.2.camel@BMThinkPad.lan.bluematt.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 20 Rejected, process for BIP 21N
Precedence: list

OK, I went ahead and changed mustimplement out for req (required).  Its
not quite as expressive, but its much shorter and still makes sense
(IMHO).  I also explicitly stated that numbers shouldnt contain commas
and should use period to separate whole numbers and fractional decimal
fractions (to avoid any localization concerns).

Matt

On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 20:02 +0100, Wladimir wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Matt Corallo
> <bitcoin-list@bluematt.me> wrote:
>         
>         All that said, I dont think its an ideal solution, depending
>         on the
>         names of variables to provide information is ugly.  If anyone
>         has a
>         better idea on how to do backward compatibility, please
>         suggest it.
> 
> I like the mustimplement: idea, though I'd recommend a shorter
> (abbreviated) prefix, to keep URL sizes small for QR codes and such,
> 
> Wladimir
> 
>