📅 Original date posted:2014-06-24
📝 Original message:Ok, wanting structured data is a decent argument, but why this random arbitrary case in particular? There are hundreds of fields like this that people might want to use.
If we're going to support one random cosmetic field, we might as well support them all with a generic structured data format.
I'd rather we just didn't have this essentially pointless "feature" at all. Let's try and keep as much cruft as possible out of the payment protocol. The textual memo field is already more than sufficient.
> On Jun 24, 2014, at 11:48, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at bitpay.com> wrote:
>
> I think there is nothing wrong with having a numeric memo field, which
> is effectively what this is. Structured rather than unstructured
> data.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140624/27e30be9/attachment.html>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 1593 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140624/27e30be9/attachment.p7s>;
Gmail [ARCHIVE] /
npub1th…470mj
2023-06-07 15:23:17
in reply to nevent1q…t3q7
Author Public Key
npub1thmlda0knxxtg4p7s8must4hccr8fclufwdraahz3fgw36p4mcksz470mjPublished at
2023-06-07 15:23:17Event JSON
{
"id": "f1a76e5f411f26746464b16c7ed624c651d3a26f3581dfa9a6c27e28c4a3e969",
"pubkey": "5df7f6f5f6998cb4543e81f7c82eb7c60674e3fc4b9a3ef6e28a50e8e835de2d",
"created_at": 1686151397,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"9815d098bc7f4989718551eb052a860bc92caef6ef36f2244b5fda76fe0b928a",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"9e4369ec59224a307f342236b81fe517d3fb189f4b921f646219712d69684649",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"b25e10e25d470d9b215521b50da0dfe7a209bec7fedeb53860c3e180ffdc8c11"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-06-24\n📝 Original message:Ok, wanting structured data is a decent argument, but why this random arbitrary case in particular? There are hundreds of fields like this that people might want to use. \n\nIf we're going to support one random cosmetic field, we might as well support them all with a generic structured data format. \n\nI'd rather we just didn't have this essentially pointless \"feature\" at all. Let's try and keep as much cruft as possible out of the payment protocol. The textual memo field is already more than sufficient. \n\n\u003e On Jun 24, 2014, at 11:48, Jeff Garzik \u003cjgarzik at bitpay.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e I think there is nothing wrong with having a numeric memo field, which\n\u003e is effectively what this is. Structured rather than unstructured\n\u003e data.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140624/27e30be9/attachment.html\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: smime.p7s\nType: application/pkcs7-signature\nSize: 1593 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140624/27e30be9/attachment.p7s\u003e",
"sig": "c459aca98a41fd984679f484d63881d5a0618504c64798a137dc48dd9c1fc5a6e422ea63616bc1f19d700197a954ff72f1ef717261467a834b7f53cbb52ae4f5"
}