From: Marco Pontello <marcopon@gmail.com>
To: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] RFC - BIP: URI scheme for Blockchain exploration
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 16:49:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAE0pAC+32rhWdBL+WbPANy0rd+eh-XsPQy-u3OHUxS0ku7eN-Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDpC55dsr4GNAUabgnOeXcNTrgHSAtM7Jqfp0_QUfjXmoQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1242 bytes --]
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Jorge Timón <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> I would really prefer chain=<chainID> over network=<chainPetnameStr>
> By chainID I mean the hash of the genesis block, see
>
> https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commit/3191d5e8e75687a27cf466b7a4c70bdc04809d39
> I'm completely fine with doing that using an optional parameter (for
> backwards compatibility).
>
I see that using the genesis block hash would be the perfectly rigorous 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 would
spare a source lookup just to write a correct reference to a tx, maybe in a
forum or a post.
So a reference to a certain tx could be either:
blockchain://tx/ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2f24ecd3918f76c17f
blockchain://tx/ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2f24ecd3918f76c17f?chain=000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f
blockchain://ca26cedeb9cbc94e030891578e0d2b688a28902114f6ad2f24ecd3918f76c17f?chain=main
(or a different element name maybe)
--
Try the Online TrID File Identifier
http://mark0.net/onlinetrid.aspx
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2041 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-01 14:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-29 11:48 [bitcoin-dev] RFC - BIP: URI scheme for Blockchain exploration Marco Pontello
2015-08-29 16:31 ` Richard Moore
2015-08-29 17:19 ` Matt Whitlock
2015-08-29 19:24 ` Richard Moore
2015-08-29 18:07 ` Andreas Schildbach
2015-09-01 14:33 ` Marco Pontello
2015-08-29 18:58 ` Btc Drak
2015-08-29 19:01 ` Matt Whitlock
2015-08-29 20:10 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-30 2:02 ` Chun Wang
2015-08-30 2:20 ` Jorge Timón
2015-09-01 22:56 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-01 14:49 ` Marco Pontello [this message]
2015-09-01 21:16 ` Matt Whitlock
2015-09-01 21:25 ` Esteban Ordano
2015-09-01 21:38 ` Marco Pontello
2015-09-01 21:42 ` Matt Whitlock
2015-09-01 21:43 ` Marco Pontello
2015-09-01 22:46 ` Jorge Timón
2015-09-01 23:25 ` Matt Whitlock
2015-09-01 16:12 ` Danny Thorpe
2015-09-01 22:59 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-01 23:57 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-29 19:28 ` Richard Moore
2015-09-01 14:51 ` Marco Pontello
2015-11-15 2:14 ` Marco Pontello
2015-11-15 11:42 ` Jorge Timón
2015-11-16 0:59 ` Marco Pontello
2015-11-16 14:43 ` Jorge Timón
2015-11-16 22:10 ` Marco Pontello
2015-11-18 11:29 ` Jorge Timón
2015-11-18 12:31 ` Marco Pontello
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAE0pAC+32rhWdBL+WbPANy0rd+eh-XsPQy-u3OHUxS0ku7eN-Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=marcopon@gmail.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jtimon@jtimon.cc \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox