Meh. I can't take this kind of criticism seriously. The token format is the *least important* thing about the protocol but it's what everyone sees and comments on because it's on the very surface.
It was a very good choice so far. We have introduced spending conditions, witnesses, DLEQ proofs and more without having to change the token format because we're using base64 JSONs. What matters is that we have well-defined models.
Right now, there is no reason at all to optimize prematurely (except for QR codes). Eventually we'll use a binary encoding once the token format stabilizes – but right now, it's not in the priority list.
calle 👁️⚡👁️
npub12r…485vg
2023-12-04 23:40:32
in reply to nevent1q…35ms
Author Public Key
npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vgPublished at
2023-12-04 23:40:32Event JSON
{
"id": "7959fe45a06b6ca8bc56e50b9d515b9d387d0b10138197a43c2ca13869dae0ac",
"pubkey": "50d94fc2d8580c682b071a542f8b1e31a200b0508bab95a33bef0855df281d63",
"created_at": 1701733232,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"2e4bb0dab7197c1ee89239958af2d9f436f112a6325ee661133302f7c7180ed1",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"e88a691e98d9987c964521dff60025f60700378a4879180dcbbb4a5027850411"
]
],
"content": "Meh. I can't take this kind of criticism seriously. The token format is the *least important* thing about the protocol but it's what everyone sees and comments on because it's on the very surface.\n\nIt was a very good choice so far. We have introduced spending conditions, witnesses, DLEQ proofs and more without having to change the token format because we're using base64 JSONs. What matters is that we have well-defined models. \n\nRight now, there is no reason at all to optimize prematurely (except for QR codes). Eventually we'll use a binary encoding once the token format stabilizes – but right now, it's not in the priority list.",
"sig": "be8a0b1ef97bda7367d376b6df6b164686a135056140c26cffc79cf5a7f4afb6df0b45b572651ca27cbb50dfb3f8dd0ce7a215b76a1f6cb782902554477e36d4"
}