►
From YouTube: URL URI working group meeting 5
Description
Agenda: https://github.com/ethereum-cat-herders/EIPIP/issues/159
Notes: https://hackmd.io/@poojaranjan/URLWorkingGroup#Meeting-5
A
There
was
another
proposal
in
discussion
that
is
4804
and
key
was
supposed
to
move
the
proposal
from
draft
to
review.
This
has
also
been
done
with
the
pull
request.
Number
5218
and
one
action
item
was
for
Loop
to
create
a
discussion
thread
at
sem
I,
see
the
discussion
thread
has
already
been
created
and
there
are
some
ongoing
discussion
for
people
listening
to
this
recording.
A
Maybe
you
may
find
the
link
to
the
discussion
thread
in
the
working
document
that
is
added
in
the
YouTube
description
and,
furthermore,
Ricardo
left
a
comment
to
discuss
the
status
of
eip831,
which
was
which
I
was
assuming
is
in
the
required
section
for
EIP
2400.
But
apparently
it
is
not.
A
I
have
added
this
item
for
today's
discussion
and
just
a
piece
of
information
like
after
the
status
of
EAP
831
was
brought
as
a
concern
in
ech
Discord.
It
was
also
discussed
in
the
last
eipip
meeting
and
as
of
now,
we
can
see
at
least
two
pull.
Requests.
A
C
Hello,
thank
you
for
pushing
for
it
yeah,
it's
kind
of
the
question.
The
only
question
is
basically
I'll,
just
also
a
thing
to
Sam
for
for
doing
the
67
dependency
there
yeah.
The
only
question
is
basically
they
are
for
the
shortcut
I'm
missing
a
bit
of
context.
I
edited
and
I
think
it
should
be
no
problem
for
most
sites.
C
The
question
is,
if
it
maybe
at
some
point,
becomes
a
problem
when
we
then
register
like
the
schema,
because
when
we
don't
have
two,
you
know
currently
now,
I
did
it
as
an
alias,
so
ethereum
and
Eve
are
allowed
both
yeah
the
only
question
there
is
basically
do
we
run
into
problems
when
we
register
it
somewhere.
If
they
are
now.
A
So
I
have
shared
the
link
to
the
pull
request.
That
is,
a
5338
which
is
about
eip67
to
be
published
as
withdrawn.
I
believe
this
is
an
in
association
with
the
eav831
I
have
a
concern,
slash
question
here:
eib
67.
Actually
there
is
no
EIP
in
the
EIP
repository
as
67..
It
was
an
issue
that
was
created.
However,
there
was
never
a
pull
request
supporting
this
issue
idea.
Also
in
the
issue.
It
is
mentioned
that
at
this
particular
proposal
is
superseded
with
the
EIP
six
eight
one
I
believe
so
yeah.
C
And
I
think
that
would
work
with
Sam's
proposal
rights,
so
he
basically
did
a
pro
request
now
published
in
67
and
Alexander.
Also
like
approved,
he
just
lost
access
to
his
old
account,
basically
yeah.
It's
a
good
way
to
get
it
in
now
that
way,
but
it's
also
nice
I
think
to
have
it
there
as
context,
because
it's
kind
of
important
as
context
because,
basically
six
eight
831
basically
keeps
backward
compatibility.
C
So
this
yeah
people
is
just
an
issue
for
a
while,
but
still
people
were
building
on
top
of
it.
So
it's
you
see
it's
just
a
200
digit
eaps
one
in
the
beginning,
people
didn't
care
that
much
about
formal
stuff.
So
it's
still
an
active
thing,
so
I
think
it's
good
to
get
it
in
there.
C
Can
almost
work
on
it
this
time
already,
so
thanks
Sam
for
that
and
I
think
it's
good
that
way.
B
I
have
a
question:
there
is
another
Eid,
okay
about
the
paid
transaction.
It
doesn't
because
the
a31
it
was
created
after
the
eap6.
B
C
A
bit
history,
wise,
I,
just
created
831,
basically
to
break
this
whole
thing
apart
a
little
bit
that
we
don't
have
to
repeat,
you
know
all
the
time,
the
same
so
to
make
it
a
bit
more
Atomic
there,
so
that
other
can
build
on
top
of
that,
so
I'm
not
yet
sure
if
the
trip
depend
on
it,
not
sure
that
it
doesn't,
but
other
ones
do
right,
and
that
was
the
whole
idea
that
basically,
we
don't
repeat
ourselves
in
a
lot
of
earps,
but
basically
it
was
foreseeable
that
more
and
more
ipaps
use
UL
standards
like
for
payment
for
receipts
for
like
then
also
the
model
connect
stuff
and
so
basically
to
build
a
small
one
and
keep
the
EIP
small.
B
Okay,
okay,
I
see
your
intent,
but
my
my
question
is:
can
we
fix
this?
Can
we
make
six
one
eight
one
depend
on
A3
one
two,
so
we
because
then
we
can
have
this
dependency
graph,
where
we
can
see
everything
that
you
that
depends
on
this
ethereum
schema
and
also,
and
then
it
will
inherit
the
Alias.
That
is
also
a
good
thing
that,
because
we
want
to
use
the
Alias
also
in
this
URL
requirements
or
in
anything
that
uses
that.
C
D
E
D
C
So
681
is
just
more
like
an
improved
67,
which
was
kind
of
a
simple
idea
from
Alex
from
the
beginning,
and
he
then
basically
took
it
over
because
Alex
had
this
idea
and
information
that
was
never,
as
you
said,
c
was
never
really
published,
so
they
pushed
it
forward.
C
C
The
idea
wasn't
also
like
if
we
like
at
some
point
register
it.
You
know
we
don't
have
to
tell
them
all
the
specific
use
cases
we
can
just
like
tell
them
both
a31
and
the
rest.
You
know,
otherwise
it
gets
too
complicated.
Yeah
you've
got
a
lot
of
use
case
on
top.
D
Of
it
did
somebody
register
web
3
as
a
prefix
I
think
that
might
have
happened.
D
E
I
didn't
register,
I
mean
ethereum,
comma
graph.
Three
I,
don't
think
so.
A
So
if
I
understand,
there
is
one
big
problem
that
is
of
EIP
67,
which
obviously
Assam
has
created
a
proposal,
but
because
Alex
may
not
have
the
access
to
it.
It
is
very
difficult
to
have
it
approved
by
him
and
because
this
is
also
being
added
as
a
pull
request
for
the
first
time,
I
wonder
some.
Can
we
have
couple
of
other
authors
added
here
and
I?
D
I
I'm,
not
a
fan
of
creating
like
useless
pull
requests
just
to
follow
the
flowchart
in
eip1,
but
I
mean
if
that's
what
we
need
to
do.
That's
what
we
need
to
do.
C
D
A
A
Okay,
so
coming
back
to
Ricardo
I,
remember
you
added
this
as
a
comment
here.
Is
there
anything
that
you
would
like
to
clarify
for
this
proposal,
or
are
we
good
in
there.
B
I
think
that
sorry
I
think
that
everything
is
good
about
the
what
we
are
just
discussing
now.
I
I
am
very
happy
to
see
that
we
can
do
so.
I
I
will
do
a
pull
request
to
eap2400
to
request
to
yeah
at
the
back.
The
dependency
there
and
yeah
yeah
I
think
that
that's
it
I
think
that
that
solves
the
problems
that
I
have.
A
Right
so
did
you
just
mention
that
the
present
eip2400,
which
is
already
in
the
review
status
I,
don't
see
eip-831
as
a
as
in
required
section.
You
are
planning
to
add
that
to
the
required
section.
B
Properly
back
on
the
on
the
document,
because
I
had
to
remove
it
to
able
to
move
forward
because
I
was
not
sure
if
Luigi
was
going
to
to
answer
or
move
forward
the
that
EIP
so
as
as
he
came
here
in
in
did
all
this
I
I'm
happy
to
put
it
back
because
I
really
like
the
the
what
what
he
did
to
actually
separated
and
so
other
eaps.
Can
he
build
on
top
of
it?
I
think
I
think
that
this
makes
sense.
A
Cool,
so
that
was
item
number
one
and
moving
on
to
item
number
two,
that
is
progress
on
idea
for
compact
URL
proposal,
I
see
a
thread
and
yeah
I,
don't
know
if
anyone
has
any
update
or
would
like
to
talk
about
this
discussion
that
is
ongoing
on
FM
thread.
F
Yeah
so
I
I
left
a
few
comments
describing
like
my
perspective
and
like
potential
ideas
for
like
a
binary
payment
request,
format
that
you
could
like
more
efficiently
encode
onto
a
QR
code
and
also
some
other
related
ideas.
I
was
having
Luke
seemed
interested
in
some
of
them
objectionable
to
other
ones,
but
I,
don't
know
how
much
people
read
over
it,
but
any
questions.
F
Foreign
well,
if
not,
then
I
think
what
I
might
do
sooner
rather
than
later
was
yeah.
That's
in
in
the
com.
The
chat
there
there's
a
link
to
the
thread.
F
I
might
write
up
like
a
draft
spec
not
as
an
EIP,
but
just
like
to
get
some
ideas
of
like
what
should
be
included
in
like
a
more
conservative
version
of
this
and
then
like
extensions
for
what
I
think
might
be
more
useful
to
have
later
on
and
I
guess.
I'll
share
it
in
the
ech
Discord
for
feedback.
A
A
Thank
you
yeah.
That
would
be
awesome,
I
mean
if
you
can
create
a
draft,
and
we
already
have
a
place
where
people
can
go
ahead
and
discuss
and
share
their
comments
and
feedbacks
related
to
that
proposal.
We
can
take
it
from
there.
F
Yeah,
just
if
anyone
has
any
other
feedback,
then
I'd
like
to
hear
it
in
the
thread.
So
thanks
foreign.
B
F
Not
necessarily
machine
only
but
something
that's
like
not
something
you
would
write
out
like
as
a
URL,
that
a
human
would
read
it's
something
that
you
could
like
very
compactly
store
on
a
QR
code
as
like
one
example,
but
because
there's
a
few
bits
in
there
about
the
rationale
that
goes
more
into
it.
A
Cool
so
yeah,
the
link
is
added
in
the
working
document
for
reference
so
for
people
to
leave
a
comment
feed
their
thoughts,
whatever
they
have
in
fem.
Another
thread
number
is
9906.
A
B
A
All
right,
thank
you
so
much.
This
proposal
is
now
out
of
a
stagnant.
This
is
in
the
review
status,
so
anyone
looking
into
the
URL
format
transaction
receipt,
please
feel
free
to
leave.
Your
comment
on
discussion
link
provided
in
the
proposal
and
obviously
the
EIP
editors
will
be
reviewing
it
further
and
yeah.
If
there
is
any
Improvement
suggestion,
you
would
be
getting
it
in
the
next
pull
request.
A
The
next
proposal
is
EAP
4804
web
3
URL
to
evm
call
message
translation.
This
was
in
draft
and
I
see.
The
proposal
has
already
been
moved
in
review
status.
Key
if
you
have
any
updates
to
share
with
the
group.
E
E
Yeah
I
think
that's
a
good
question,
so
so
you
mean
using
the
ethereum
as
the
schema
and
also
kind
of
like
maybe
last
three
as
the
prefix
yeah.
E
I
think
that
that
could
be
a
a
big,
basically
another
kind
of
like
another
way
to
basically
present
the
URL,
but
that,
but
definitely
using
about
three
schema.
That
would
be
shorter,
but
definitely
we
can
say
hi.
This
is
basically
abbreviation
of
the
a61
and
also
we
also
register
last
three
schema.
That
is
a
further
abbreviation
of
of
no
W3
schema,
so
just
two
letter,
okay,
so
another
abbreviation
of
web3.
So
definitely
we
can
I
can
make
it
to
basically
two
types
of
the
schema.
E
You
know
if
y804,
including
the
full
name,
are
based
on
beef,
681
and
then,
but
the
rest
of
format
should
be
the
same,
so
just
changing
the
schema
prefix.
That
is
what
you
mean.
A
Well:
okay,
that
was
the
last
item.
As
per
the
agenda,
any
other
thing
people
would
like
to
discuss
foreign.
E
So
one
question
so
regarding
the
review
process
so
from
reveal
to
Pixelmon
last
code
to
find
out
what
is
any
flexible
reviewer
will,
step
in
or
need
to
be
automatically
assigned
or
I
need
to
find
a
reviewer
to
to
go
to
this
process.
D
Yeah,
so
review
is
kind
of
it's
more
of
a
signal
to
the
ecosystem
that
you're
not
expecting
to
change
the
EIP,
so
people
can
start
playing
around
with
it.
You
there's
no
formal,
like
reviewer,
that's
the
EIP
editors
are
going
to
assign.
If
you
want
to
get
feedback
on
it,
you
should
probably
find
the
people
yourself
like
these
people
here
are
probably
the
people
that
should
review
it.
D
E
A
Yeah,
that's
right,
and
maybe
at
some
point
if
it
is
not
merged
and
it
is
waiting
for
for
the
review
at
some
point,
it
will
be
brought
up
in
the
EAP
editors
apprenticeship
meetings.
There
generally
we
try
to
discuss
some
of
the
ercs.
However,
for
this
ERC
we
already
have
this
working
group
where
we
can
discuss
it
formally,
but
sometimes
it
is
also
discussed
there
and
you
can
or
maybe
collect
feedback
from
there.
A
Well,
thank
you.
This
looks
like
a
short
meeting.
I
have
one
last
announcement
that
is
for
wallet
have
the
next
meeting
is
planned
soon
right,
yep.
A
A
That
is
not
there
on
the
protocol
calendar
because
that
is
not
directly
related
to
protocol.
However,
it
is
for
applications,
so
we
do
not
add
it
in
the
calendar,
but
you
can
find
the
information
like
I
will
try
to
edit
it
on
the
event
calendar.
Just.
D
A
A
All
right,
yeah
I,
think
that's
all
from
the
item
that
were
listed
for
discussion
today.
If
people
want
we
can
meet
again
in
two
weeks
if
there
are
progress
to
discuss
and
if
there
are
any
further
eips
that
people
would
like
to
be
added
for
considering
like
moving
forward
towards
the
final
status,
please
feel
free
to
leave
a
comment
on
agenda
and
we
can
bring
it
up
in
the
next
meeting
and
let's
hope
that
we
move
all
these
proposals
like
in
Fast
Forward
mode.