docs(163): BRC-164 + underscore writers + defer p-scheme - #1
Merged
GenericCPU merged 10 commits intoAug 18, 2026
Merged
Conversation
- Point per-output id: at BRC-164 (not token id). - Writers MUST underscore bsv21:<tokenId> values; readers still normalize. - Note fine-grained p bsv21 … permissions out of scope for this profile.
…dump - Tags: bsv21:<id>, amt, dec, icon, optional filters; drop bare bsv21 marker - CI: protocolID/keyID/counterparty; SHOULD sym (case-preserving) - Do not require inscription fields (p/op/id/amt/…) duplicated into CI - Parse token economics from script; BRC-164 for id: list keys
shruggr
marked this pull request as draft
August 18, 2026 18:08
Keep Brandon’s remittance-in-CI model for id/amt/op/sym/dec/icon plus derivation. Tags are exact listOutputs filters (bsv21:<id> primary); amt/sym/dec/icon tags MAY for legacy only. No full inscription JSON required in CI. Reader priority: CI → tags → script.
shruggr
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 18, 2026 19:40
GenericCPU
approved these changes
Aug 18, 2026
GenericCPU
left a comment
GenericCPU
left a comment
Owner
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good — approve.
Clear split: CI for load-bearing tip fields + derivation, tags for exact listOutputs filters (bsv21:<tokenId> primary). Reader priority CI → tags → script matches how we resolve. Underscore writers, BRC-164 for per-output id:, and deferring p bsv21 … are all fine. Bare bsv21 marker drop and “no full inscription JSON in CI” are compatible with our filing (we already write bsv21:<id> + CI fields; extra tags/CI keys remain allowed).
Author
|
It's a PR against your draft PR. I approve of the draft once you merge this stuff in |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Collaborative polish on your BRC-163 (authorship stays yours). Aligns remittance with a clearer tags vs CI split without replacing the profile:
customInstructionsid,amt,op,sym,dec,icon+ derivation (protocolID/keyID/counterparty) when this wallet locked the tiplistOutputsfilters — primarilybsv21:<tokenId>; optional deploy/auth/op/issuer; BRC-164id:Also:
bsv21marker tag; no full inscription JSON (p, …) required in CIamt/sym/dec/icontags are MAY (legacy / compat) — not the primary read path (exact tag match is a poor balance API)id:p bsv21 …still out of scopeReader priority: CI → tags → script.
Test plan