1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1UXt16-0003fk-Uh
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 02 May 2013 12:53:45 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.219.49 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.219.49; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-oa0-f49.google.com;
Received: from mail-oa0-f49.google.com ([209.85.219.49])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1UXt16-0006Pt-0j
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 02 May 2013 12:53:44 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id l20so467601oag.22
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 02 May 2013 05:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.14.226 with SMTP id s2mr1723516oec.124.1367499218661;
Thu, 02 May 2013 05:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.167.169 with HTTP; Thu, 2 May 2013 05:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRtq5J4HAeQGTfKc+vQZ9eo1Qw4nc=t2_Pu3KAuE_3WGQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP2OPU8cpvUJ0B8z00PPp6jOGCjQ1ipZ9mq8_LSLo4Rebg@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T0Apu=ice=QdQpOb3LVTv9HcTjTmbb5KzZ3+o8CuF3kzg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgRtq5J4HAeQGTfKc+vQZ9eo1Qw4nc=t2_Pu3KAuE_3WGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:53:38 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: SVVWyRjUR_fWKhf06L2wJrK8cXg
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3v_5ZJgnn4Qbam6d23BYKeHdvaReDV9dsVyC1tGenb8w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1f9c428b80104dbbbb956
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1UXt16-0006Pt-0j
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP21 bitcoin URIs and HTML5
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 12:53:45 -0000
--e89a8fb1f9c428b80104dbbbb956
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Chrome has whitelisted bitcoin: URIs for web apps, and Firefox it turns out
doesn't use whitelisting at all, so it already works there.
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/14531004
I'm hoping this means web wallet developers won't be put off from
supporting the payment protocol (that risk is the reason I started this
work).
The next step is to file bugs against WebKit (for Safari/iOS/misc other
platforms), and IE, though I don't know if Microsoft uses open bug trackers
much.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Ian pointed out some errors in the BIP21 spec. What's the process for
> >> amending the BIP? Do we need to create a new one and mark the old one as
> >> replaced, or can we just fix it in place given the relatively exotic
> nature
> >> of most of the issues?
> > Those all sound like bugs in the BIP; I think they should just be fixed,
> I
> > don't think we need a new BIP.
>
> Yup. Corrections are fine, esp ones which are not gratuitously
> incompatible.
>
--e89a8fb1f9c428b80104dbbbb956
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Chrome has whitelisted bitcoin: URIs for web apps, and Fir=
efox it turns out doesn't use whitelisting at all, so it already works =
there.<div><br></div><div><a href=3D"https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com=
/14531004">https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/14531004</a><br>
</div><div><br></div><div style>I'm hoping this means web wallet develo=
pers won't be put off from supporting the payment protocol (that risk i=
s the reason I started this work).</div><div style><br></div><div style>
The next step is to file bugs against WebKit (for Safari/iOS/misc other pla=
tforms), and IE, though I don't know if Microsoft uses open bug tracker=
s much.</div><div><br></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote">
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Gregory Maxwell <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:gmaxwell@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gmaxwell@gmail.com</a>&=
gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 =
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class=3D"im">On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Gavin Andresen <<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:gavinandresen@gmail.com">gavinandresen@gmail.com</a>> wrote=
:<br>
>> Ian pointed out some errors in the BIP21 spec. What's the proc=
ess for<br>
>> amending the BIP? Do we need to create a new one and mark the old =
one as<br>
>> replaced, or can we just fix it in place given the relatively exot=
ic nature<br>
>> of most of the issues?<br>
> Those all sound like bugs in the BIP; I think they should just be fixe=
d, I<br>
> don't think we need a new BIP.<br>
<br>
</div>Yup. =C2=A0Corrections are fine, esp ones which are not gratuitously =
incompatible.<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--e89a8fb1f9c428b80104dbbbb956--
|
