š
Original date posted:2016-09-20
š Original message:On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:15:45PM +0200, Tom via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> === Serialization order===
>
> The tokens defined above have to be serialized in a certain order for the
> transaction to be well-formatted. Not serializing transactions in the
> order specified would allow multiple interpretations of the data which
> can't be allowed.
If the order of the tokens is fixed, the tokens themselves are redundant
information when tokens are required; when tokens may be omitted, a simple
"Some/None" flag to mark whether or not the optional data has been omitted is
appropriate.
Also, if you're going to break compatibility with all existing software, it
makes sense to use a format that extends the merkle tree down into the
transaction inputs and outputs.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160920/04780272/attachment.sig>;
Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] /
npub1m2ā¦a2np2
2023-06-07 17:53:25
in reply to nevent1qā¦k2ke
Author Public Key
npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2Published at
2023-06-07 17:53:25Event JSON
{
"id": "2767127f31edfe78977da8f7587fb2817867e2150f46c2ae465958a0b3b02bc5",
"pubkey": "daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa",
"created_at": 1686160405,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"1a569d98e0e6ce5c9d61181fddad681419ffdb691b73a42ccb4919035df06596",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"5e1b410426c562c1aee3c9e56dc8b6b8ecbf28344fee08a9d853ef672ad47fb2",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"bc4b5c3c366f36f93aa3e261f5c7832ecb85137537baf5e8f00a4321e85f0477"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2016-09-20\nš Original message:On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:15:45PM +0200, Tom via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e === Serialization order===\n\u003e \n\u003e The tokens defined above have to be serialized in a certain order for the\n\u003e transaction to be well-formatted. Not serializing transactions in the\n\u003e order specified would allow multiple interpretations of the data which\n\u003e can't be allowed.\n\nIf the order of the tokens is fixed, the tokens themselves are redundant\ninformation when tokens are required; when tokens may be omitted, a simple\n\"Some/None\" flag to mark whether or not the optional data has been omitted is\nappropriate.\n\n\nAlso, if you're going to break compatibility with all existing software, it\nmakes sense to use a format that extends the merkle tree down into the\ntransaction inputs and outputs.\n\n-- \nhttps://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 455 bytes\nDesc: Digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160920/04780272/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "a496b67498932fdbaabc7d9cb00a7c917c830acd4eb8e17afd768e6c0841452f053a748432a77ce773340ae5e026f2ebfb87bc46773afd4da90fac55267b2c32"
}