Re: [Bitcoin-development] Accepting broken QRcodes

[Gary Rowe <g.rowe@froot.co.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3396 bytes --]

I'm sure that there are many but my Google Search-Fu is not strong enough
to build a query to identify how widespread they are.

Maybe once we have sufficient evidence to support the suspicion we should
post to the main developer forum asking for a cleanup. After all, a Bitcoin
URI starting bitcoin://<address> doesn't actually make much sense because
there is no hierarchy in Bitcoin - it's flat with only an address being a
mandatory element.

I don't want to be all anal about this, but looking at RFC 3986 #10 (
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#page-10) it's pretty clear that
introducing a false hierarchy is breaking the specification since it
presumes the existence of a relative URI.

On 16 July 2012 10:02, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:

> But is he the only one using the broken URLs? It was my impression that
> they were widespread already.
>
> Wladimir
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Gary Rowe <g.rowe@froot.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Is it worth having a few more people email Ben to ask him politely to
>> fall into line with the BIP? No point encouraging broken windows by not
>> speaking out.
>>
>>
>> On 16 July 2012 09:16, Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de> wrote:
>>
>>> > I asked Ben to fix this (social networks don't parse QRcodes after
>>> > all), but after explaining that social networks don't parse URLs
>>> > without :// in them, he stopped responding to my emails. So I've gone
>>> > ahead and added support for reading these types of URLs to bitcoinj,
>>> > in the interests of "just works" interoperability.
>>> >
>>> > This mail is just a heads up in case anyone else wants to do the same
>>> > thing. Hopefully at some point, Ben will stop generating such QRcodes
>>> > and we can remove these hacks and get back to BIP compliance.
>>>
>>> The problem with this "accept everything even if broken" approach is
>>> that people will probably never fix the broken stuff. So we likely end
>>> up with a fragmented de-facto standard.
>>>
>>> That does not mean I am totally against accepting broken URLs, but there
>>> should be at least a promise that they will be fixed at the source.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
>>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
>>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
>>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5119 bytes --]