On Wednesday 21 Sep 2016 18:45:55 adiabat via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Hi-
>
> One concern is that this doesn't seem compatible with Lightning as
> currently written. Most relevant is that non-cooperative channel close
> transactions in Lightning use OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY, which references the
>
On Thursday, 22 September 2016 14:27:29 CEST Peter Todd wrote:
> CSV uses per-input sequence numbers; you only have a per-tx equivalent.
I think you misunderstand tagged systems at a very basic level. You think
that html can only use a bold tag once in a document? Thats equivalent
to what you
On Thursday, 22 September 2016 14:26:18 CEST Peter Todd wrote:
> > «The way towards that flexibility is to use a generic concept made
> > popular various decades ago with the XML format. The idea is that we
> > give each field a name and this means that new fields can be added or
> > optional
Hi Tom
> I think you misunderstand tagged systems at a very basic level. You think
> that html can only use a bold tag once in a document? Thats equivalent
> to what you are saying.
Would the "additional" segment contain the same amount of
nSequence-equivalent token as the number of inputs
On Thursday, 22 September 2016 21:59:12 CEST Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> Hi Tom
>
> > I think you misunderstand tagged systems at a very basic level. You
> > think that html can only use a bold tag once in a document? Thats
> > equivalent to what you are saying.
>
> Would the
