Add ERC: Wallet Asset Discovery #709
Conversation
eip-review-bot
changed the title
lukaisailovic
changed the title
eip-review-bot
changed the title
eip-review-bot
changed the title
|
The commit 06feb19 (as a parent of b321265) contains errors. |
| }; | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| `account` is a required field that indicates for which account assets are requested. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this an account address or CAIP-10?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Its account address, however I named it account to keep the naming consistent with other calls.
| type WalletGetAssetsResponse = Record<Hex, Asset[]>; | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| The key **SHOULD** be [EIP-155](./eip-155.md) chainId |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about cross-chain assets? E.g. Solana? Maybe this should be a CAIP-2?
| name: string; | ||
| symbol: string; | ||
| decimals: number; | ||
| [key: string]: any; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What extra would go here? If this is different per wallet, might be a bit hard/unrealistic for applications to coerce. Can we keep it strict?
| address: "0xEeeeeEeeeEeEeeEeEeEeeEEEeeeeEeeeeeeeEEeE"; | ||
| balance: Hex; | ||
| type: "native"; | ||
| metadata: any; |
| { | ||
| address: "0xEeeeeEeeeEeEeeEeEeEeeEEEeeeeEeeeeeeeEEeE", | ||
| balance: "0xcaaea35047fe5702", | ||
| type: "native" | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wonder if we should have a rule that native asset must be the first item in the array. Would feel a bit weird to have a linear time complexity just to extract a native balances across chains (ie. there could be many many tokens on each chain).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would this suggestion resolve your concern?
|
|
||
| Asset fields: | ||
|
|
||
| `address` is the address of the asset as Hex. Native assets **MUST** use `0xEeeeeEeeeEeEeeEeEeEeeEEEeeeeEeeeeeeeEEeE` address specified by [ERC-7528](./eip-7528.md) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Kind of odd. Why do we need to include a stub address for native?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wanted to keep the type for any asset
type Asset = {
address: Hex;
balance: Hex;
type: string;
metadata: any;
};
I wanted to make the address mandatory, instead of address?: Hex;
What do you think is better for the client implementations?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
address: Hex | "native";?
| "0x1": [ | ||
| { | ||
| address: "0x123", | ||
| balance: "0xcaaea35047fe5702", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggest using address as the key to simplify lookups
| "0x1": [ | |
| { | |
| address: "0x123", | |
| balance: "0xcaaea35047fe5702", | |
| "0x1": { | |
| "0x123": { | |
| balance: "0xcaaea35047fe5702", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah yeah, then you could have native key too
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is an interesting point, would simplify lookups a lot for the clients!
JSON-RPC method for wallets to share a user’s complete asset list with Dapps, including assets not easily discoverable through on-chain information alone.