Re: [Bitcoin-development] Providing Payment Request within URI

2015-02-26 Thread Andreas Schildbach
Yeah, you'd be limited to simple usecases. X509 signing or lots of outputs will make the QR code hard to scan. However, if all you want to do is send to a custom script (without using P2SH) I invite you to have a look at

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Providing Payment Request within URI

2015-02-26 Thread Oleg Andreev
Thanks for references. Yeah, I don't need X509 signing (if I could use certificates, I wouldn't need to include PR in the URL in the first place). I presume you used BITCOIN:-payment request instead of bitcoin:?r=somescheme://payment request to make it more compact. I also tried to look up

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Providing Payment Request within URI

2015-02-26 Thread Oleg Andreev
Base43 is the same as any BaseX standard, but using a different alphabet (43 characters). It's meant to be used for efficiently storing binary data into QR codes. The alphabet is picked to match the 'Alphanumeric' input mode of QR codes as closely as possible, but at the same time be allowed

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Providing Payment Request within URI

2015-02-26 Thread Andreas Schildbach
On 02/26/2015 12:14 PM, Oleg Andreev wrote: Base43 is the same as any BaseX standard, but using a different alphabet (43 characters). It's meant to be used for efficiently storing binary data into QR codes. The alphabet is picked to match the 'Alphanumeric' input mode of QR codes as closely

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Providing Payment Request within URI

2015-02-25 Thread Mike Hearn
Andreas' wallet supports this, but don't do it. Payment requests can get larger in future even without signing. Exploding the capacity of a QR code is very easy. Instead, take a look at the Bluetooth/NFC discussion happening in a different thread. On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Oleg Andreev