📅 Original date posted:2016-08-17
📝 Original message:> On Aug 17, 2016, at 15:24, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> URI scheme instead of stdio/pipe
> --------------------------------
> The URI scheme is not ugly. Its a modern way – implemented in almost all
> platforms – how applications can interact with each other while not
> directly knowing each other. Registering a URI scheme like "bitcoin://"
> has some concrete advantages over just piping through stdio.
>
> Also, the stdio/piping approach does not work for mobile platforms
> (where the URI scheme works).
>
> The URI scheme does not require any sorts of wallet app level
> configuration (where the stdio/pipe approach would require to configure
> some details about the used hardware wallet).
Hi everybody, just thought I’d throw my opinion in here.
The URI scheme is a nice idea, but this ignores the fact that hardware wallet vendors do most of the work on talking between the computer/mobile and the wallet on a lower level of communication. In the case of BitLox, the base protocol is Google’s ProtoBuf. The commands and transaction data is in a “schema” which is then encoded in different methods accessible via ProtoBuf (depending on the data being sent). The advantages of this protocol is that it can be implemented on a wide variety of platforms. (but that’s a whole 'nother discussion)
The URI would be handled waaaaay up in the specific application (such as the mytrezor wallet software or the various standalone wallets) - nowhere near the actual hardware communications layer.
Best regards,
Dana
BitLox
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160817/bddd5d9e/attachment.sig>;
Dana L. Coe [ARCHIVE] /
npub12t…s0f0q
2023-06-07 17:52:49
in reply to nevent1q…evgq
Author Public Key
npub12t55l99vrct59976gxrt9v5p03cnhh95h2eg4yqh60ylv6kjgacqms0f0qPublished at
2023-06-07 17:52:49Event JSON
{
"id": "7c4134f2d6f87341f4f36166e73548271a5cbb249a4bd4624f6efc544b651e4e",
"pubkey": "52e94f94ac1e174297da4186b2b2817c713bdcb4bab28a9017d3c9f66ad24770",
"created_at": 1686160369,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6e7f7cb2c3110cb7289a3abd667304a3b4e6f9ba4e2581c492d7b93c214a5ea1",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"89e03a97aeef785605eb29fc48b4fc724fc4b76cf49efd7e4b5d9c03db9517a6",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"e46a04d96699f2755b88397549642a542d0672ab34975f8e6a14c90d37d3e840"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-08-17\n📝 Original message:\u003e On Aug 17, 2016, at 15:24, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e URI scheme instead of stdio/pipe\n\u003e --------------------------------\n\u003e The URI scheme is not ugly. Its a modern way – implemented in almost all\n\u003e platforms – how applications can interact with each other while not\n\u003e directly knowing each other. Registering a URI scheme like \"bitcoin://\"\n\u003e has some concrete advantages over just piping through stdio.\n\u003e \n\u003e Also, the stdio/piping approach does not work for mobile platforms\n\u003e (where the URI scheme works).\n\u003e \n\u003e The URI scheme does not require any sorts of wallet app level\n\u003e configuration (where the stdio/pipe approach would require to configure\n\u003e some details about the used hardware wallet).\n\nHi everybody, just thought I’d throw my opinion in here.\n\nThe URI scheme is a nice idea, but this ignores the fact that hardware wallet vendors do most of the work on talking between the computer/mobile and the wallet on a lower level of communication. In the case of BitLox, the base protocol is Google’s ProtoBuf. The commands and transaction data is in a “schema” which is then encoded in different methods accessible via ProtoBuf (depending on the data being sent). The advantages of this protocol is that it can be implemented on a wide variety of platforms. (but that’s a whole 'nother discussion)\n\nThe URI would be handled waaaaay up in the specific application (such as the mytrezor wallet software or the various standalone wallets) - nowhere near the actual hardware communications layer.\n\nBest regards,\nDana\nBitLox\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 841 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160817/bddd5d9e/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "11897e3df62fa976b7d57f37ebb1aead755f7d8dca257d2815bbf4e9fa93271325d4593833953e3229721f298783c4cfc78eaf5a1f5334353baac53c8c6631fe"
}