Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Token Updateability #25

Open
ohager opened this issue Aug 27, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Token Updateability #25

ohager opened this issue Aug 27, 2021 · 0 comments
Assignees

Comments

@ohager
Copy link
Owner

ohager commented Aug 27, 2021

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Nowadays, the tokens description, like title, images etc is absolutely immutable. Due to the rebranding many older tokens would have broken url, outdated images etc.

Describe the solution you'd like
By using the Signum Messaging system it is possible to send a update description for a contract.
The common payload of a token description is this:

{
   "name":"Phoenix Wallet",
   "desc":"The Phoenix wallet is a multi-platform wallet for Web, Windows, MacOS, Linux, iOS and Android.The wallet has not only an elaborated and easy-to-use user interface, but offers improved security using local signing for transactions, a multi-account management, internationalization, messaging, automatic updates and much more.",
   "repo":"https://phoenix-wallet.rocks",
   "img":"https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafkreiexrsuevq5vurq6v2oml3qcp6zrrs5uvllnhxzwi3yzlfsota63da",
   "lic":"MIT",
   "tags":[
      "wallet"
   ]
}

As for an update we need to add the token id as reference:

{
    "token": "16335739889631628566"
   "name":"Phoenix Wallet",
   // ...
}

That way the dappository checks for each token for the latest message of the owner. Additionally, the owner chain must be checked also, in case a token was transferred.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Just recreating a contract is not a viable option as the previous contract has scoring and a balance. It is possible to transfer the points, but this might be an vector for fraudulent options, as the scoring has to be set via public function calls...
Extending the contracts logic and make description etc variable does not help on updating the first version contracts.

Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

@ohager ohager self-assigned this Aug 27, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant