Re: [bitcoin-dev] Base64-encoded descriptors
Sounds like a good UX improvement, but do we really need to introduce a new encoding? Perhaps bech32 could be used instead. On Tue, Dec 24, 2019, 12:07 PM Chris Belcher via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > I've recently been playing around with descriptors, and they are very > nice to work with. They should become the standard for master public > keys IMO. > > One downside is that users cant easily copypaste them to-and-fro to make > watch-only wallet. The descriptors contain parenthesis and commas which > stop highlighting by double-clicking. Also the syntax might look scary > to newbs. > > An obvious solution is to base64 encode the descriptors. Then users > would get a text blog as the master public key without any extra details > to bother them, and developers can easily base64 decode for developing > with them. > > A complication might be the descriptor checksum. If there's a typo in > the base64 text then that could decode into multiple character errors in > the descriptor, which might be problematic for the checksum. Maybe the > descriptor could be base64 encoded without the checksum, then attach the > checksum to the end of the base64 text. > > Thoughts? > > I didn't come up with these ideas, they came from discussions with > achow101. > ___ > 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
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Base64-encoded descriptors
I'd rather see something using Base58 or even better Bech32. Base64 is not URL/QR code friendly. On Tue, Dec 24, 2019, 18:06 Chris Belcher via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > I've recently been playing around with descriptors, and they are very > nice to work with. They should become the standard for master public > keys IMO. > > One downside is that users cant easily copypaste them to-and-fro to make > watch-only wallet. The descriptors contain parenthesis and commas which > stop highlighting by double-clicking. Also the syntax might look scary > to newbs. > > An obvious solution is to base64 encode the descriptors. Then users > would get a text blog as the master public key without any extra details > to bother them, and developers can easily base64 decode for developing > with them. > > A complication might be the descriptor checksum. If there's a typo in > the base64 text then that could decode into multiple character errors in > the descriptor, which might be problematic for the checksum. Maybe the > descriptor could be base64 encoded without the checksum, then attach the > checksum to the end of the base64 text. > > Thoughts? > > I didn't come up with these ideas, they came from discussions with > achow101. > ___ > 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] Base64-encoded descriptors
I've recently been playing around with descriptors, and they are very nice to work with. They should become the standard for master public keys IMO. One downside is that users cant easily copypaste them to-and-fro to make watch-only wallet. The descriptors contain parenthesis and commas which stop highlighting by double-clicking. Also the syntax might look scary to newbs. An obvious solution is to base64 encode the descriptors. Then users would get a text blog as the master public key without any extra details to bother them, and developers can easily base64 decode for developing with them. A complication might be the descriptor checksum. If there's a typo in the base64 text then that could decode into multiple character errors in the descriptor, which might be problematic for the checksum. Maybe the descriptor could be base64 encoded without the checksum, then attach the checksum to the end of the base64 text. Thoughts? I didn't come up with these ideas, they came from discussions with achow101. ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
