Taproot specifically did not do this for good reasons that are well
documented. I recommend you to read documentation first before attempting
to make changes.

Dňa po 16. 3. 2026, 11:48 sashabeton <sashabeton2007@gmail.com> napísal(a):

> Hi everyone,
>
> I'd like to propose a new native SegWit output type: Pay to Schnorr Key
> Hash (P2SKH).
>
> == The problem ==
>
> The two most relevant output types today each solve half the problem:
> - P2WPKH has a compact 22-byte scriptPubKey, but uses ECDSA and puts the
> full 33-byte compressed public key in the witness (~108 witness bytes per
> input).
> - P2TR uses Schnorr signatures (64-byte witness), but embeds the full
> 32-byte x-only public key directly in the scriptPubKey, making outputs 12
> bytes larger than P2WPKH and exposing the key in every unspent output.
>
> Neither type achieves both a compact output and a compact witness
> simultaneously.
>
> == The proposal ==
>
> P2SKH uses OP_2 <hash160(P.x)> as the scriptPubKey (22 bytes, same as
> P2WPKH). Spending requires a single 64-byte Schnorr signature. Verification
> works by key recovery: given the signature (R, s) and the challenge e =
> TaggedHash("P2SKH/challenge", R.x || hash160(P.x) || msg), the verifier
> recovers P = e^-1 * (s*G - R) and checks that hash160(P.x) matches the
> program. The sighash reuses the BIP341 transaction digest, so cross-version
> replay is prevented by the scriptPubKey commitment.
>
> The result is the smallest combined footprint of any current single-key
> output type — a 22-byte output with a 64-byte witness — while keeping the
> public key off-chain until spending.
>
> == Tradeoffs ==
>
> The key-recovery step costs roughly one extra field inversion and scalar
> multiplication compared to direct Schnorr verification. This is the price
> of the 12-byte output size reduction.
>
> == Open questions ==
>
> 1. BIP360 also claims witness version 2. If both proposals advance, one
> needs to move. Version 3 seems like a natural alternative for P2SKH.
> 2. Naming — "P2SKH" follows the established pattern but "P2TRKH" has been
> suggested to emphasise Schnorr/taproot lineage. Opinions welcome.
>
> Full draft:
> https://github.com/sashabeton/bips/blob/3cb9e07984b571e9510370ab7e7218620be580dc/p2skh.md
> PoC implementation: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34826
>
> Thanks in advance for any feedback.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3dcadd5d-702a-4e6c-ad6c-2ddfe68ec73en%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/3dcadd5d-702a-4e6c-ad6c-2ddfe68ec73en%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALkkCJbcUur0kao0%3DB2QQvQmM210O1TB_JkEkWLDqmzboqsN9Q%40mail.gmail.com.