Bech32 and WIF payload format are mostly orthogonal issues. You can design a new wallet import format now and later switch it to Bech32.
> On Sep 17, 2017, at 7:42 AM, AJ West via bitcoin-dev > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Hi I have a small interjection about the point on error correction (excuse me > if it seems elementary). Isn't there an argument to be made where a wallet > software should never attempt to figure out the 'correct' address, or in this > case private key? I don't think it's crazy to suggest somebody could import a > slightly erroneous WIF, the software gracefully error-corrects any problem, > but then the user copies that error onward such as in their backup processes > like a paper wallet. I always hate to advocate against a feature, I'm just > worried too much error correcting removes the burden of exactitude and > attention of the user (eg. "I know I can have up to 4 errors"). > > I'm pretty sure I read those arguments somewhere in a documentation or issue > tracker/forum post. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the bigger picture in this > particular case, but I was just reminded of that concept (even if it only > applies generally). > > Thanks, > AJ West > >> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 4:10 AM, Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev >> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> On 17.09.2017 04:29, Pieter Wuille wrote: >> > >> > This has been a low-priority thing for me, though, and the computation work >> > to find a good checksum is significant. >> > >> >> Thanks for the info. I guess this means that a bech32 format for private >> keys is not going to happen soon. Even if such a format was available, >> the issue would remain for segwit-in-p2sh addresses, which use base58. >> >> The ambiguity of the WIF format is currently holding me from releasing a >> segwit-capable version of Electrum. I believe it is not acceptable to >> use the current WIF format with segwit scripts; that would just create >> technological debt, forcing wallets to try all possible scripts. There >> is a good reason why WIF adds a 0x01 byte for compressed pubkeys; it >> makes it unambiguous. >> >> I see only two options: >> 1. Disable private keys export in Electrum Segwit wallets, until a >> common WIF extension has been agreed on. >> 2. Define my own WIF extension for Electrum, and go ahead with it. >> >> Defining my own format does make sense for the xpub/xprv format, because >> Electrum users need to share master public keys across Electrum wallets. >> It makes much less sense for WIF, though, because WIF is mostly used to >> import/sweep keys from other wallets. >> >> I would love to know what other wallet developers are going to do, >> especially Core. Are you going to export private keys used in segwit >> scripts in the current WIF format? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
