First round of modifications on ZIP227#20
Conversation
…d circular dependency between ZIPs
✅ Deploy Preview for zcash-zips-qedit ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
| 2 assetDescSize byte The length of the asset\_desc string in bytes | ||
| Varies asset\_desc byte UTF-8 encoded string, of size assetDescSize bytes | ||
| Varies nNotes compactSize The number of notes in the issuance action | ||
| TBD noteSize byte The size, in bytes, of a Note |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As per: #20 (comment) it'd be nice to document the noteSize
|
|
||
| - check that :math:`0 < \mathsf{assetDescSize} <= 512`. | ||
| - check that :math:`\mathsf{asset\_desc}` is a string of length :math:`\mathsf{assetDescSize}` bytes. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
asset_desc is defined as "UTF-8 encoded string, of size assetDescSize bytes" in the table. Yet, it's Byte size is set to Varies and its type is set as byte.
It seems like it's Byte size shouldn't be Varies but assetDescSize instead and it's type should be a byte array byte[assetDescSize]
| 2 assetDescSize byte The length of the asset\_desc string in bytes | ||
| Varies asset\_desc byte UTF-8 encoded string, of size assetDescSize bytes | ||
| Varies nNotes compactSize The number of notes in the issuance action | ||
| TBD noteSize byte The size, in bytes, of a Note |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As per: #20 (comment) it'd be nice to document the noteSize
AntoineRondelet
force-pushed
the
zip-0227-ar-first-round
branch
from
9a10f3f to
f81e13b
Compare
|
I'm a bit lost on notations (especially the use of math fonts). We seem to be using Is there a convention somewhere? 
|
Looking at other ZIPs (ZIP 225 for example), it seems that terms that are entries in transaction format tables are always denoted via double backticks (with the use of |
vivek-arte
left a comment
vivek-arte
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approved with comments, see above.
|
Thanks @vivek-arte, but then, why is notes used with single backticks? (same for IssueBundle, IssueAuthSig etc) |
|
You're right, the use of single backticks was confusing and unnecessary. I've tried to improve on those parts in PR#28, moving to double backticks for the table items. The I'm also wondering how strict we need to be about using double backticks only for table entries -- for example, in the above PR, I changed I'm not sure there is a single consistent choice throughout all the prior ZIPs, but if we pick a strict format and stick to it that would be good too. We should document it somewhere, probably in the issue #25 discussion. I'm not sure we should include it in the Rationale section of either ZIP, but we can bring it to the attention of the ZIP editors, and they could choose if they want to make these conventions uniform going ahead and so on. |
|
As an update, also see this comment made by Daira on the |
Improved style and content of ZIP 227. --------- Co-authored-by: Vivek Arte <vivek@qed-it.com>
Improved style and content of ZIP 227. Co-authored-by: Vivek Arte <vivek@qed-it.com>
2 participants
As per the title, this PR does a first round of changes on ZIP 227.
Each commit does one change, so we can easily cherry pick/rebase to keep the relevant ones.