On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 1:47:08 PM Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-dev wrote: > FWIW, BIP44 also doesn't encode a seed birthday. This needed so that SPV > wallets do not need to scan from the beginning of the blockchain. > > That doesn't mean BIP44 could not be final. There are some wallets that > interoperate on that standard and that's fine.
Right. The Status doesn't depend on whether it is a good idea or not, only whether or not people are de facto using it. BIP 2's BIP Comments would have provided a place for Thomas and yourself to criticise the BIP, but unfortunately this was too controversial. > I think BIP43 should be made final as well, if it isn't already. BIP 43 merely advises other BIPs how they might do things, so it goes into the Draft->Active Status flow rather than Draft->Accepted->Final. Luke _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
