BIP 179: Name for payment recipient identifiers #856

pull emilengler wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from emilengler:emilengler-redefinition-of-the-term-address changing 2 files +65 −0
  1. emilengler commented at 7:28 pm on October 17, 2019: contributor
    This was discussed here and got really good feedback. This is the BIP draft for it. Feedback appreciated.
  2. in bip-emilengler-redefinition-of-the-term-address.mediawiki:4 in 868b556b04 outdated 
    0@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
1+<pre>
2+  BIP: UNDEFINED
3+  Titel: Redefinition of the term address
4+  Author: Emil Engler <me@emilengler.com>
    MarcoFalke commented at 8:06 pm on October 17, 2019:
    I’d suggest to find one co-author, so that potential changes to the BIP can be addressed by either
    emilengler commented at 8:18 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Good idea, I will ask on the ML
    MarcoFalke commented at 8:20 pm on October 17, 2019:
    If no one else steps up, you can put me in.
  3. in bip-emilengler-redefinition-of-the-term-address.mediawiki:8 in 868b556b04 outdated 
    0@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
1+<pre>
2+  BIP: UNDEFINED
3+  Titel: Redefinition of the term address
4+  Author: Emil Engler <me@emilengler.com>
5+  Status: Draft
6+  Type: Informational
7+  Created: 2019-10-17
8+  License: Public Domain
    MarcoFalke commented at 8:06 pm on October 17, 2019:
    BIP2 recommends to use CC0 instead. And I think all new BIPs did that.
    emilengler commented at 8:19 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Understandable, some countries (e.g Germany) don’t have the US like public domain
  4. in bip-emilengler-redefinition-of-the-term-address.mediawiki:17 in 868b556b04 outdated 
    12+This BIP proposes a new term for 'address'
13+
14+==Specification==
15+The new term is:
16+''Bitcoin'' '''Invoice''' ''Address''
17+Short: ''BIA''
    MarcoFalke commented at 8:09 pm on October 17, 2019:
    I think BIA causes more confusion than it serves as a easily recognizable identifier. Also it will be misleading, when in the (far) future, it will just be “Bitcoin invoice”.
    emilengler commented at 8:19 pm on October 17, 2019:
    You might be right. I think invoice is short enough
  5. in bip-emilengler-redefinition-of-the-term-address.mediawiki:45 in 868b556b04 outdated 
    40+The reason why we use ''Bitcoin Invoice Address'' or just ''Invoice'' is to show that it is more like a temporary thing.
41+We decided to keep Bitcoin and Address as optional terms for the reasons named above.
42+
43+==Backwards Compatibility==
44+Because this is an informational BIP it does not break any compatibility.
45+However some documentation, for example BIP 21, needs to get updated.
    MarcoFalke commented at 8:11 pm on October 17, 2019:
    I think this can be omitted. Whenever a software implements this UI change, they will update their documentation as well.
    emilengler commented at 8:20 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Ok
    MarcoFalke commented at 9:59 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Oh, I only meant that the " However some documentation, for example BIP 21, needs to get updated. " sentence ought to be removed, not the whole section
  6. in bip-emilengler-redefinition-of-the-term-address.mediawiki:48 in 868b556b04 outdated 
    43+==Backwards Compatibility==
44+Because this is an informational BIP it does not break any compatibility.
45+However some documentation, for example BIP 21, needs to get updated.
46+
47+==Reference Implementation==
48+''Not implemented yet''
    MarcoFalke commented at 8:12 pm on October 17, 2019:
    I think a list of “reference implementations” might be spammy and doesn’t really help other implementations. To implement this in a given piece of software, a replacement of the term “bitcoin address” with “bitcoin invoice address” in the user facing strings should be sufficient.
    emilengler commented at 8:20 pm on October 17, 2019:
    ACK
  7. in bip-emilengler-redefinition-of-the-term-address.mediawiki:54 in 868b556b04 outdated 
    49+
50+==Acknowledgements==
51+Thanks to Chris Belcher for the suggestion of the term 'Bitcoin Invoice Address'
52+
53+==Copyright==
54+This BIP is released into the Public Domain.
    MarcoFalke commented at 8:13 pm on October 17, 2019:
    See comment above.
  8. MarcoFalke commented at 8:13 pm on October 17, 2019: member
    Thanks! Concept ACK
  9. emilengler commented at 8:32 pm on October 17, 2019: contributor
    @MarcoFalke Done, also asked on the ML
  10. in bip-emilengler-redefinition-of-the-term-address.mediawiki:3 in 3fe8174e08 outdated 
    0@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
1+<pre>
2+  BIP: UNDEFINED
3+  Titel: Redefinition of the term address
    ryanofsky commented at 8:35 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Maybe title should be “Replacing the term address” if the goal isn’t to give the word “address” a new meaning, but to introduce new terms that should be used instead
    emilengler commented at 8:54 pm on October 17, 2019:
    ACK
  11. emilengler commented at 8:56 pm on October 17, 2019: contributor
    BIP title has changed, could someone change the title of the PR? I have insufficient permissions.
  12. in bip-emilengler-replacing-the-term-address.mediawiki:3 in 6c9a935e8f outdated 
    0@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
1+<pre>
2+  BIP: UNDEFINED
3+  Titel: Replacing the term address
    luke-jr commented at 9:00 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Title*
    luke-jr commented at 9:02 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Suggest “Terminology for payment recipient identifiers” or something that refers to the new standard rather than the previous standard.
    emilengler commented at 9:14 pm on October 17, 2019:
    I think to get more attention it would be better to include the old de-facto standard into the title
    luke-jr commented at 9:21 pm on October 17, 2019:
    I don’t agree. The title is supposed to be for the BIP, not an older thing being replaced.
    emilengler commented at 9:36 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Convinced, updated. This should be the final title version of the BIP title however. Sorry for letting you update it again :confused:
  13. in bip-emilengler-replacing-the-term-address.mediawiki:24 in 6c9a935e8f outdated 
    19+For ''Bitcoin'':
20+* Useful for multicoin wallets to indicate that it belongs to Bitcoin
21+* Indicates a difference between a lightning and an on-chain invoice
22+For ''Address'':
23+* To not confuse users with a completely new term
24+* To show that it is where you send something to
    luke-jr commented at 9:04 pm on October 17, 2019:
    This belongs in the Rationale section.
  14. in bip-emilengler-replacing-the-term-address.mediawiki:16 in 6c9a935e8f outdated 
    11+==Abstract==
12+This BIP proposes a new term for 'address'
13+
14+==Specification==
15+The new term is:
16+''Bitcoin'' '''Invoice''' ''Address''
    luke-jr commented at 9:04 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Suggest making “Address” an extended temporary form only for backward compatibility purposes.
    emilengler commented at 9:17 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Ok, will put into that section
  15. in bip-emilengler-replacing-the-term-address.mediawiki:30 in 6c9a935e8f outdated 
    25+
26+This gives us the four following possibilities:
27+* Bitcoin Invoice Address
28+* Bitcoin Invoice
29+* Invoice Address
30+* Invoice
    luke-jr commented at 9:05 pm on October 17, 2019:
    “Invoice” alone may be too confused with regular invoices in general.
    emilengler commented at 9:12 pm on October 17, 2019:
    IN the lightning user-land it also just Invoice IIRC
  16. in bip-emilengler-replacing-the-term-address.mediawiki:15 in 6c9a935e8f outdated 
    10+
11+==Abstract==
12+This BIP proposes a new term for 'address'
13+
14+==Specification==
15+The new term is:
    luke-jr commented at 9:06 pm on October 17, 2019:
    A definition is needed. Particularly one that should be inclusive of Lightning or other L2 networks.
    emilengler commented at 2:06 pm on October 18, 2019:
    I added a note for the ‘‘address’’ part, hop it is sufficient
    luke-jr commented at 2:55 pm on October 18, 2019:

    I don’t see a definition in the current draft either…

    Someone who doesn’t know “address” needs to be able to understand this BIP.

    MarcoFalke commented at 3:02 pm on October 18, 2019:
    “A bitcoin invoice address is a human-readable encoding of a scriptPubKey, for example bech32 addresses BIP173 or base58 legacy addresses”?
    luke-jr commented at 6:15 pm on October 18, 2019:

    No, that’s too specific to technical details (and excludes L2 stuff), and neglects to cover the intent/purpose of the invoice address.

    Maybe something like “A bitcoin invoice [address] is a string of characters that can be used to indicate the intended recipient and purpose of a transaction.” ?

    emilengler commented at 10:37 pm on October 18, 2019:
    Ok, good to know I will use @luke-jr definition. It should contain that it in affiliated to the recipient in some way.
    emilengler commented at 10:39 pm on October 18, 2019:
    Done
  17. in bip-emilengler-replacing-the-term-address.mediawiki:41 in 6c9a935e8f outdated 
    36+The motivation for this BIP is to change the term address to something that indicates that the address is connected to a single transaction.
37+
38+==Rationale==
39+The reason why we use ''Bitcoin Invoice Address'' or just ''Invoice'' is to show that it is more like a temporary thing.
40+We decided to keep Bitcoin and Address as optional terms for the reasons named above.
41+
    luke-jr commented at 9:07 pm on October 17, 2019:
    A backwards compatibility section is needed.
    emilengler commented at 9:13 pm on October 17, 2019:
    It was suggested to remove it 3fe8174e084a994bd6f8d4b4fdc474a36752b5d0 Was the old one sufficient?
    luke-jr commented at 9:20 pm on October 17, 2019:

    No, it doesn’t actually address backward compatibility.

    You want something like “since the term used will initially be invoice address, it includes the existing term address and should be immediately recognisable to users”

  18. luke-jr changes_requested
  19. luke-jr renamed this:
    Add BIP: Redefinition of the term address
    New BIP: Replacing the term address
    on Oct 17, 2019
  20. luke-jr renamed this:
    New BIP: Replacing the term address
    New BIP: Terminology for payment recipient identifiers
    on Oct 17, 2019
  21. in bip-emilengler-terminology-for-payment-recipient-identifiers.mediawiki:18 in 2ffd6a76ae outdated 
    11+==Abstract==
12+This BIP proposes a new term for 'address'
13+
14+==Specification==
15+The new term is:
16+''Bitcoin'' '''Invoice''' ''Address''
    luke-jr commented at 9:45 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Suggest specifying (vaguely) the intended sunset on the “address” suffix.
    emilengler commented at 9:53 pm on October 17, 2019:
    Done
  22. in bip-emilengler-terminology-for-payment-recipient-identifiers.mediawiki:43 in 2ffd6a76ae outdated 
    38+* Invoice Address
39+* Invoice
40+
41+==Backwards Compatibility==
42+To avoid issues, the 'Address' suffix is permitted, but not recommended.
43+The suffix 'address' remains so users should be immediately able to recognize it until the new term is widely known.
    murchandamus commented at 3:47 pm on October 18, 2019:
    The suffix is capitalized once and not capitalized in the next line.
    emilengler commented at 10:42 pm on October 18, 2019:
    Will fix
  23. in bip-emilengler-terminology-for-payment-recipient-identifiers.mediawiki:25 in 2ffd6a76ae outdated 
    20+The term 'address' however indicates consistency because nearly everything on the internet or the offline world with the term 'address'
21+is something that rarely or even never changes (postal address, e-mail address, IP-Addresses (depends heavily on the provider), etc.)
22+The motivation for this BIP is to change the term address to something that indicates that the address is connected to a single transaction.
23+
24+==Rationale==
25+The reason why we use ''Bitcoin Invoice Address'' or just ''Invoice'' is to show that it is more like a temporary thing.
    murchandamus commented at 3:51 pm on October 18, 2019:
    The “temporary” seems a bit off. It’s not really temporary, an invoice doesn’t change or go away. It’s just that it is single-use. Therefore, how about “[…]is to emphasize that it is single-use.”
    emilengler commented at 10:43 pm on October 18, 2019:
    Single use is what I meant. Thanks for the word(s) suggestion
  24. in bip-emilengler-terminology-for-payment-recipient-identifiers.mediawiki:26 in 2ffd6a76ae outdated 
    21+is something that rarely or even never changes (postal address, e-mail address, IP-Addresses (depends heavily on the provider), etc.)
22+The motivation for this BIP is to change the term address to something that indicates that the address is connected to a single transaction.
23+
24+==Rationale==
25+The reason why we use ''Bitcoin Invoice Address'' or just ''Invoice'' is to show that it is more like a temporary thing.
26+The terms ''Bitcoin'' and ''Address'' are optional this has the following reasons:
    murchandamus commented at 3:53 pm on October 18, 2019:
    How about: “are optional for the following reasons:”
    emilengler commented at 10:43 pm on October 18, 2019:
    +1 It sounds better
  25. murchandamus changes_requested
  26. emilengler commented at 4:52 pm on October 21, 2019: contributor
    @MarcoFalke I added you as a co-author as no responded so far. Which E-Mail should I use?
  27. in bip-emilengler-terminology-for-payment-recipient-identifiers.mediawiki:4 in b7c2cd20fa outdated 
    0@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
1+<pre>
2+  BIP: UNDEFINED
3+  Title: Terminology for payment recipient identifiers
4+  Author: Emil Engler <me@emilengler.com>, Marco Falke <example@example.com>
    luke-jr commented at 5:21 pm on October 21, 2019:

    This will need to be multiple lines.

    You can add me too if you want, since I guess I ended up providing a bunch of content in the end. ^^;

    emilengler commented at 5:29 pm on October 21, 2019:
    Sure thing, what E-Mail should I use?
    emilengler commented at 5:35 pm on October 21, 2019:
    Name added, just need an E-Mail.
    MarcoFalke commented at 1:47 pm on October 22, 2019:

    Just my normal git email:

    0Author:     MarcoFalke <falke.marco@gmail.com>
    emilengler commented at 3:14 pm on October 22, 2019:
    Done
  28. in bip-emilengler-terminology-for-payment-recipient-identifiers.mediawiki:6 in 85bbe343bf outdated 
    0@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
1+<pre>
2+  BIP: UNDEFINED
3+  Title: Terminology for payment recipient identifiers
4+  Author: Emil Engler <me@emilengler.com>
5+          MarcoFalke <falke.marco@gmail.com>
6+          Luke Dashjr <luke@example.com>
    luke-jr commented at 10:37 pm on October 22, 2019:
    luke+bip@dashjr.org
    emilengler commented at 1:05 pm on October 23, 2019:
    Done
  29. emilengler commented at 1:08 pm on October 23, 2019: contributor
    Squashed, could this get a BIP number now as it is probably ready? @luke-jr
  30. in bip-emilengler-terminology-for-payment-recipient-identifiers.mediawiki:26 in 446d7638d8 outdated 
    21+The address suffix should only be used as a transitional step.
22+
23+A ''Bitcoin'' Invoice ''Address'' is a string of characters that can be used to indicate the intended recipient and purpose of a transaction.
24+
25+==Motivation==
26+Bitcoin addresses are intended to be only used '''once''' and you should generate a new one for every new incoming payment.
    murchandamus commented at 11:05 pm on October 25, 2019:
    Shouldn’t this sentence start with Bitcoin invoice addresses…? :grin:
    emilengler commented at 1:31 pm on October 26, 2019:
    It describes a problem of the past and currently the present so I think it will be fine there. :P
  31. in bip-emilengler-terminology-for-payment-recipient-identifiers.mediawiki:28 in 446d7638d8 outdated 
    23+A ''Bitcoin'' Invoice ''Address'' is a string of characters that can be used to indicate the intended recipient and purpose of a transaction.
24+
25+==Motivation==
26+Bitcoin addresses are intended to be only used '''once''' and you should generate a new one for every new incoming payment.
27+The term 'address' however indicates consistency because nearly everything on the internet or the offline world with the term 'address'
28+is something that rarely or even never changes (postal address, e-mail address, IP-Addresses (depends heavily on the provider), etc.)
    murchandamus commented at 11:08 pm on October 25, 2019:
    In English “email” is much more commonly written without a dash. Similarly, drop the dash in “IP address” and don’t capitalize the “a” (see e.g. Wikipedia:IP address).
    emilengler commented at 1:31 pm on October 26, 2019:
    Ok
    emilengler commented at 1:33 pm on October 26, 2019:
    Fixed
  32. murchandamus changes_requested
  33. MarcoFalke commented at 2:09 pm on November 4, 2019: member
    @luke-jr Is this ready?
  34. luke-jr renamed this:
    New BIP: Terminology for payment recipient identifiers
    New BIP 179: Terminology for payment recipient identifiers
    on Nov 4, 2019
  35. luke-jr commented at 3:13 pm on November 4, 2019: member
    Assigned BIP 179
  36. emilengler commented at 8:47 pm on November 4, 2019: contributor
    @luke-jr Thanks, will modify the text
  37. emilengler commented at 8:52 pm on November 4, 2019: contributor
    @luke-jr Thanks, updated, squashed and reworded. What’s next?
  38. luke-jr commented at 1:59 am on November 5, 2019: member 
    0bip-0179.mediawiki has too-long TItle (45 > 44 char max) at scripts/buildtable.pl line 126, <$F> line 3.
  39. in bip-0179.mediawiki:3 in 1ccd4c05e4 outdated 
    0@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
1+<pre>
2+  BIP: 179
3+  Title: Terminology for payment recipient identifiers
    MarcoFalke commented at 3:06 am on November 5, 2019:

    Hmm interesting travis failure:

    0bip-0179.mediawiki has too-long TItle (45 > 44 char max) at scripts/buildtable.pl line 126, <$F> line 3.
    emilengler commented at 12:05 pm on November 5, 2019:
    Looks like this BIP needs a new name, any suggestions?
    luke-jr commented at 3:02 pm on November 5, 2019:
    “Name for payment recipient identifiers” maybe?
    emilengler commented at 8:50 pm on November 5, 2019:
    @luke-jr ACK, it is 39 chars. Could you please update the title again…
    emilengler commented at 8:52 pm on November 5, 2019:
    Updated and forced pushed
  40. luke-jr renamed this:
    New BIP 179: Terminology for payment recipient identifiers
    BIP 179: Name for payment recipient identifiers
    on Nov 5, 2019
  41. luke-jr added the label New BIP on Nov 5, 2019
  42. in bip-0179.mediawiki:10 in d43f13ac74 outdated 
     5+          MarcoFalke <falke.marco@gmail.com>
 6+          Luke Dashjr <luke+bip@dashjr.org>
 7+  Status: Draft
 8+  Type: Informational
 9+  Created: 2019-10-17
10+  License: CC0
    MarcoFalke commented at 10:42 pm on November 5, 2019:
    Undefined license CC0 in bip-0179.mediawiki at scripts/buildtable.pl line 154, <$F> line 10.
    luke-jr commented at 0:58 am on November 6, 2019:
    Should be CC0-1.0
    emilengler commented at 5:00 pm on November 6, 2019:
    Fixed
  43. Add BIP 179: Name for payment recipient identifiers d3ff4b1e9e
  44. in bip-0179.mediawiki:13 in 1108fd7c97 outdated 
     6+          Luke Dashjr <luke+bip@dashjr.org>
 7+  Status: Draft
 8+  Type: Informational
 9+  Created: 2019-10-17
10+  License: CC0-1.0
11+</pre>
    MarcoFalke commented at 6:34 pm on November 6, 2019:
    Missing Comments-URI in bip-0179.mediawiki at scripts/buildtable.pl line 176, <$F> line 11.
    emilengler commented at 9:40 pm on November 6, 2019:
    Done, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/wiki/Comments:BIP-0179
    MarcoFalke commented at 10:27 pm on November 6, 2019:

    Please add this to the readme:

     0+> | [[bip-0179.mediawiki|179]]
 1
 2+> |
 3
 4+> | Name for payment recipient identifiers
 5
 6+> | Emil Engler, MarcoFalke, Luke Dashjr
 7
 8+> | Informational
 9
10+> | Draft
11
12+> |-
    emilengler commented at 1:58 pm on November 7, 2019:
    Done
  45. MarcoFalke commented at 2:00 pm on November 7, 2019: member
    @luke-jr
  46. luke-jr merged this on Nov 8, 2019
  47. luke-jr closed this on Nov 8, 2019
  48. emilengler commented at 4:15 pm on November 8, 2019: contributor
    @luke-jr Thanks for merging, what are the next steps until it gets accepted and reaches final?
  49. MarcoFalke commented at 4:33 pm on November 8, 2019: member
    @emilengler BIPs aren’t “accepted” there is no central authority that could do that. A BIP is merged in the repo after basic formatting rules have been obeyed. Anyone is free to not implement or to implement a BIP.
  50. luke-jr commented at 5:48 pm on November 8, 2019: member
    The BIP Status field exists to reflect real-world status, so lacking specific conditions in BIP 2 (AFAICT), I guess it should become “Active” when there is a very obvious trend of adopting the proposed language.


emilengler MarcoFalke ryanofsky luke-jr murchandamus

Labels
New BIP

github-metadata-mirror

This is a metadata mirror of the GitHub repository bitcoin/bips. This site is not affiliated with GitHub. Content is generated from a GitHub metadata backup.
generated: 2024-12-26 18:10 UTC
This site is hosted by @0xB10C
More mirrored repositories can be found on mirror.b10c.me