View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0004334Talerdocumentationpublic2016-11-20 03:26
ReporterMarcello Stanisci Assigned ToMarcello Stanisci  
PrioritynormalSeveritytextReproducibilityhave not tried
Status closedResolutionfixed 
Product Version0.0 
Target Version0.2Fixed in Version0.2 
Summary0004334: Field types inconsistency
DescriptionThroughout the API it's common having some JSON object description mentioning
that one of its field is a EddsaPublicKey type. That leaves the reader
disoriented for multiple reasons:

1 There is no specification of this type throughout the whole API
2 We put this type in JSON directly in base32 strings
3 In other parts the same object has just a 'string' type
TagsNo tags attached.


Marcello Stanisci

2016-03-22 19:01

viewer   ~0010313

I suggest to assign the object a SomeType type and then link to the
SomeType description where it's said that's actually a base32 encoding.
Just note that this requires some change to the exchange API, but at least
it saves us to say 'base32 encoding of ...' for any object field lying in
this case

Florian Dold

2016-03-23 14:25

manager   ~0010323

I don't see why this would require any change to the exchange API, and I don't really understand what the problem is in the first place.

EddsaPublicKey, when used in an interface declaration, is an alias for 'string'.

Of course the documentation should link EddsaPublicKey to its definition, namely an alias to string.

Are you suggesting to add an additional wrapper around every field that consists of a single string? Like

 { merchant_pub: {eddsa_public_key: "ABCD...." }, ...}

this seems unnecessarily verbose and does not really help to improve the documentation or anything.

Christian Grothoff

2016-03-23 17:22

manager   ~0010326

I read Marcello as saying that first of all we describe the type inconsistently.

IMO we should use "EddsaPublicKey" as the type, and then somewhere explain that all of these are Base32-encoded as strings. We should _not_ do the additional wrapping (first of all, due to inefficiency).

Christian Grothoff

2016-05-05 15:28

manager   ~0010647

We should discuss this one in-person.

Christian Grothoff

2016-05-31 15:16

manager   ~0010815

Whenever we mention Curve25519 keys/signatures, this should link to and

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2016-03-22 18:56 Marcello Stanisci New Issue
2016-03-22 19:01 Marcello Stanisci Note Added: 0010313
2016-03-23 14:25 Florian Dold Note Added: 0010323
2016-03-23 17:17 Christian Grothoff Severity minor => text
2016-03-23 17:22 Christian Grothoff Note Added: 0010326
2016-05-05 15:28 Christian Grothoff Status new => acknowledged
2016-05-05 15:28 Christian Grothoff Product Version => 0.0
2016-05-05 15:28 Christian Grothoff Target Version => 0.1
2016-05-05 15:28 Christian Grothoff Note Added: 0010647
2016-05-31 15:16 Christian Grothoff Note Added: 0010815
2016-09-27 22:28 Christian Grothoff Target Version 0.1 => 0.2
2016-10-14 15:16 Christian Grothoff Status acknowledged => resolved
2016-10-14 15:16 Christian Grothoff Fixed in Version => 0.2
2016-10-14 15:16 Christian Grothoff Resolution open => fixed
2016-10-14 15:16 Christian Grothoff Assigned To => Marcello Stanisci
2016-11-20 03:26 Christian Grothoff Status resolved => closed