You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
While I know that the goal is to move everyone to ticking off sats every minute via podcast:value for BTC donations, not everyone yet has the capability to get onto the Lightning network. Also, some podcasters may prefer an alternate type of cryptocoin for donations instead, such as Etherium or Stellar. We should probably add documentation regarding support for cryptocoin URLs both for podcasters and podcast app developers. This should tide things over until Lightning Network is easy and ubiquitous enough for regular adoption. (I'll just note that as a software developer by trade and podcaster by night, I still have problems wrapping my head around how Lighting's supposed to work, especially for keysend. That's holding me back more than the node requirement.)
As it stands, Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and Etherium all have URI schemes registered with IANA. Bitcoin (and Bitcoin Cash) get the definition of their schemes from BIP 21 and Etherium from EIP-831. At the very least, the bitcoin: scheme is recognized by multiple wallet apps on Windows and Android, and probably on other platforms as well. I assume that the same goes for Bitcoin Cash and Etherium wallets. For these schemes, we can probably just provide guidance to app developers to treat such URIs as they would regular URLs since a user with an appropriate wallet on their device will simply be sent to their wallet app. For podcasters, they can be pointed to the appropriate *IP docs or we can offer our own documentation on how to craft an appropriate URI for a given wallet address.
For other coins, right now I don't see any others that have registered URI schemes and my thought is there be dragons. However, I think it'd be good to at least say something to anyone who wants to accept various altcoins via the funding tag (even if it's just "are you sure you want to do this?").
Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I can give it a shot, but I think that guidance for elements should be a separate document from the namespace spec itself. For the spec, essentially all we need to do is update the url attribute for podcast:funding from accepting a URL to accepting a URI instead.
While I know that the goal is to move everyone to ticking off sats every minute via podcast:value for BTC donations, not everyone yet has the capability to get onto the Lightning network. Also, some podcasters may prefer an alternate type of cryptocoin for donations instead, such as Etherium or Stellar. We should probably add documentation regarding support for cryptocoin URLs both for podcasters and podcast app developers. This should tide things over until Lightning Network is easy and ubiquitous enough for regular adoption. (I'll just note that as a software developer by trade and podcaster by night, I still have problems wrapping my head around how Lighting's supposed to work, especially for keysend. That's holding me back more than the node requirement.)
As it stands, Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and Etherium all have URI schemes registered with IANA. Bitcoin (and Bitcoin Cash) get the definition of their schemes from BIP 21 and Etherium from EIP-831. At the very least, the
bitcoin:
scheme is recognized by multiple wallet apps on Windows and Android, and probably on other platforms as well. I assume that the same goes for Bitcoin Cash and Etherium wallets. For these schemes, we can probably just provide guidance to app developers to treat such URIs as they would regular URLs since a user with an appropriate wallet on their device will simply be sent to their wallet app. For podcasters, they can be pointed to the appropriate *IP docs or we can offer our own documentation on how to craft an appropriate URI for a given wallet address.For other coins, right now I don't see any others that have registered URI schemes and my thought is there be dragons. However, I think it'd be good to at least say something to anyone who wants to accept various altcoins via the funding tag (even if it's just "are you sure you want to do this?").
Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: