From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Rreav-0002S5-1T for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 29 Jan 2012 23:55:37 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from nm10.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([98.138.90.73]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with smtp (Exim 4.76) id 1Rreat-0001lK-Ur for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 29 Jan 2012 23:55:36 +0000 Received: from [98.138.90.55] by nm10.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jan 2012 23:55:30 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.244] by tm8.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jan 2012 23:55:29 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1058.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jan 2012 23:55:29 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 974974.88430.bm@omp1058.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 50262 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Jan 2012 23:55:29 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: 5zBR1wgVM1m6IzwmHv9eosL7jbnYFrFCgyQIaz4_6IhFBL6 NkK1Fs8crXN4IC52MUTrOa1tBE682zlK3q8nX29beVKDm9izUyR37Dpu3Ygg RB5kQfhAfMywl4ZqsMk.UCwIt.ddKkuqGlQsvt6mDLwkC3CxO9Nb.jQTyM_D Nkt8LDpWsZ7GhMYyu_ZnFK6UJKvnoalqfDQs319mIDPje8c9jhef9ZKP45Fn PWeVuv1NX_0NLFULs38kXUi0NuPNCRsJcL.jyUjdVkgczQaFbo79XfXHBOlx kvQ1VZkhzPT0VO4LWvRVXU3TtSZbPSHQtiT1pipY833YlypGmeNO_pHsppNN 4D6d.aHFBIUctZlJRUlDY3cbuaX1nqC3X_CxljRLZMhvpnTHgvXtgJAVzSY2 z0qRUy4Vry9W1GpSMNNq1AUXTJ1I64Ya.Ved6QXrvDDHjtxpJlUHdFYct5Pn ivQJQ0QNRJpWcSA-- Received: from [92.20.138.208] by web121003.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 29 Jan 2012 15:55:29 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.116.331537 Message-ID: <1327881329.49770.YahooMailNeo@web121003.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 15:55:29 -0800 (PST) From: Amir Taaki To: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-2027350018-1563295217-1327881329=:49770" X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (zgenjix[at]yahoo.com) -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 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 -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [98.138.90.73 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.3 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Headers-End: 1Rreat-0001lK-Ur Subject: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 21 (modification BIP 20) X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Amir Taaki List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 23:55:37 -0000 ---2027350018-1563295217-1327881329=:49770 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Matt Corallo posted a modification of BIP 20 in an earlier email and I asked him if he wanted to become the champion of that BIP he submitted. It is a modification of BIP 20 sans the alternative non-decimal number stuff. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0021 Right now, I will ask the GUI client implementations like MultiBit or Bitcoin-Qt, not different codebases like BitCoinJ or libbitcoin if they support BIP 20 or BIP 21. Feel free to raise any objections. More weight will be given to GUIs with actual URI scheme implementations and it's good to have a general consensus. ---2027350018-1563295217-1327881329=:49770 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Matt Corallo posted a modification of BIP 20 in an earlier email and I asked him if he wanted to become the champion of that BIP he submitted.

It is a modification of BIP 20 sans the alternative non-decimal number stuff.


Right now, I will ask the GUI client implementations like MultiBit or Bitcoin-Qt, not different codebases like BitCoinJ or libbitcoin if they support BIP 20 or BIP 21. Feel free to raise any objections.

More weight will be given to GUIs with actual URI scheme implementations and it's good to have a general consensus.
---2027350018-1563295217-1327881329=:49770--