From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin addresses -- opaque or not
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 16:12:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBgpFx5vOWWL9izdC1UMvRCV19Lmerm0bw2xwSzf01DW2g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKaEYhJ+v0NfbzVEDEUh69D-n_4=Nd544fsm0a++QwsqcS3RVw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Melvin Carvalho
<melvincarvalho@gmail•com> wrote:
> There was some confusion on IRC as to whether bitcoin addresses are opaque
> or not.
>
> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Address
>
> For the sake of argument let's say that opaque means that you can tell
> nothing about the address by examining the characters.
>
> My understanding was that they are NOT opaque, and that if that has changed,
> it will invalidate much at least some wiki page, for examples at least some
> of the following would now be false:
I'm afraid this is the result of a misunderstanding.
Yesterday on IRC you were asking why the URI specification doesn't
include the semantics and encoding of addresses. Some people,
including me, argued that addresses should be considered opaque. That
doesn't mean they don't have well-specified definition, only that for
the purposes of URI parsing and handling, code shouldn't know or care
what they represent or how they are formatted. Addresses are specified
in one place, and the URI format simply passes addresses through.
The reason for keeping them independent is that the address format
could change (say, a new type is added, like P2SH (BIP13) before), and
there is no reason why this should break or even concern URI handling
code. Clearly, anything that actually interprets addresses in order to
construct transactions will need changing. It's just two separate
concerns, and they should be dealt with separately.
--
Pieter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-11 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-11 13:11 Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-11 13:44 ` Wladimir
2013-06-11 14:12 ` Pieter Wuille [this message]
2013-06-11 15:29 ` Luke-Jr
2013-06-15 9:50 ` Melvin Carvalho
2013-06-22 11:48 ` Melvin Carvalho
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAPg+sBgpFx5vOWWL9izdC1UMvRCV19Lmerm0bw2xwSzf01DW2g@mail.gmail.com \
--to=pieter.wuille@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=melvincarvalho@gmail$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox