[Bitcoin-development] BIP21 bitcoin URIs and HTML5
HTML5 allows web apps to register themselves for handling URI schemes, such as the bitcoin: URI that is already in use and being extended as part of the payment protocol. The bad news is that for security reasons there is a whitelist of acceptable schemes in the spec: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/timers.html#dom-navigator-registerprotocolhandler The good news is that yesterday I talked to Hixie about it and he added bitcoin to the whitelist: http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7849to=7850 I'm currently finding out what the process is for browser makers to notice the change (perhaps they watch the spec commit history and nothing needs to be done), but within a few months most users should have browsers that can accept bitcoin as a web-app handleable protocol scheme. I suppose IE10 users may be the laggards, but I guess we can live with that for now. Ian pointed out some errors in the BIP21 spec. What's the process for amending the BIP? Do we need to create a new one and mark the old one as replaced, or can we just fix it in place given the relatively exotic nature of most of the issues? Here's his feedback: - BNF doesn't say what it's character set is (presumably it's Unicode) - bitcoinparams production doesn't define the separator, so in theory the syntax is ...?label=foomessage=fooother=foo (rather than ...?label=foomessage=foo etc) - the syntax allows ?amount=FOOamount=1.1 as far as I can tell, since otherparam matches any name followed by any value, including amount followed by a bogus value. - pchar is referenced without definition. - the simpler syntax is just wrong (it would result in bitcoin:address?amount=1?label=FOO rather than bitcoin:address?amount=1label=FOO) BTW the IETF URL specs are being obsoleted by http://url.spec.whatwg.org/, at least for Web purposes. In that case matters. -- Try New Relic Now We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP21 bitcoin URIs and HTML5
I had another amendment, which roughly (can't remember the details) has to do with case-sensitivity of the scheme part and parameter names. If I remember right, BITCOIN:1d4...?AMOUNT=0.1 would be a correct URI but not valid in the sense of BIP21 currently. On 04/24/2013 09:42 AM, Mike Hearn wrote: HTML5 allows web apps to register themselves for handling URI schemes, such as the bitcoin: URI that is already in use and being extended as part of the payment protocol. The bad news is that for security reasons there is a whitelist of acceptable schemes in the spec: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/timers.html#dom-navigator-registerprotocolhandler The good news is that yesterday I talked to Hixie about it and he added bitcoin to the whitelist: http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7849to=7850 I'm currently finding out what the process is for browser makers to notice the change (perhaps they watch the spec commit history and nothing needs to be done), but within a few months most users should have browsers that can accept bitcoin as a web-app handleable protocol scheme. I suppose IE10 users may be the laggards, but I guess we can live with that for now. Ian pointed out some errors in the BIP21 spec. What's the process for amending the BIP? Do we need to create a new one and mark the old one as replaced, or can we just fix it in place given the relatively exotic nature of most of the issues? Here's his feedback: - BNF doesn't say what it's character set is (presumably it's Unicode) - bitcoinparams production doesn't define the separator, so in theory the syntax is ...?label=foomessage=fooother=foo (rather than ...?label=foomessage=foo etc) - the syntax allows ?amount=FOOamount=1.1 as far as I can tell, since otherparam matches any name followed by any value, including amount followed by a bogus value. - pchar is referenced without definition. - the simpler syntax is just wrong (it would result in bitcoin:address?amount=1?label=FOO rather than bitcoin:address?amount=1label=FOO) BTW the IETF URL specs are being obsoleted by http://url.spec.whatwg.org/, at least for Web purposes. In that case matters. -- Try New Relic Now We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- Try New Relic Now We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP21 bitcoin URIs and HTML5
Ian pointed out some errors in the BIP21 spec. What's the process for amending the BIP? Do we need to create a new one and mark the old one as replaced, or can we just fix it in place given the relatively exotic nature of most of the issues? Those all sound like bugs in the BIP; I think they should just be fixed, I don't think we need a new BIP. I vote for a new meta-data item in the BIP header: Corrected: date -- -- Gavin Andresen -- Try New Relic Now We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP21 bitcoin URIs and HTML5
On 24 April 2013 09:42, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: HTML5 allows web apps to register themselves for handling URI schemes, such as the bitcoin: URI that is already in use and being extended as part of the payment protocol. The bad news is that for security reasons there is a whitelist of acceptable schemes in the spec: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/timers.html#dom-navigator-registerprotocolhandler The good news is that yesterday I talked to Hixie about it and he added bitcoin to the whitelist: http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=7849to=7850 I'm currently finding out what the process is for browser makers to notice the change (perhaps they watch the spec commit history and nothing needs to be done), but within a few months most users should have browsers that can accept bitcoin as a web-app handleable protocol scheme. I suppose IE10 users may be the laggards, but I guess we can live with that for now. This is great news for bitcon, and the IANA application will be improved if there is evidence of it being used Ian pointed out some errors in the BIP21 spec. What's the process for amending the BIP? Do we need to create a new one and mark the old one as replaced, or can we just fix it in place given the relatively exotic nature of most of the issues? Here's his feedback: - BNF doesn't say what it's character set is (presumably it's Unicode) - bitcoinparams production doesn't define the separator, so in theory the syntax is ...?label=foomessage=fooother=foo (rather than ...?label=foomessage=foo etc) - the syntax allows ?amount=FOOamount=1.1 as far as I can tell, since otherparam matches any name followed by any value, including amount followed by a bogus value. - pchar is referenced without definition. - the simpler syntax is just wrong (it would result in bitcoin:address?amount=1?label=FOO rather than bitcoin:address?amount=1label=FOO) BTW the IETF URL specs are being obsoleted by http://url.spec.whatwg.org/, at least for Web purposes. In that case matters. Not 100% sure how accurate this is, tho it may be the world view of some folks in WHATWG. WHATWG is not a major standards body tho. Work on improving the URL spec is always welcome, as it is the value proposition of the Web. -- Try New Relic Now We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- Try New Relic Now We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
