Re: Blockchain Technologies Feature Analysis

On 10/10/2016 09:52 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> http://web-payments.github.io/flex-ledger/vocabulary.html
> 
> Excellent!  What's the scope, will it include terms like the block 
> header fields, or limited to protocol/algorithm level fields?

Depends on what the consensus ends up being... :)

Our thoughts right now go something like this:

There will be an overall vocabulary for protocol/algorithm related stuff.

There will be blockchain specific vocabularies for things like Bitcoin /
Ethereum / etc.

Since it's Linked Data at the core, we expect that vocabularies from
different sources will be mixed.

> http://dhs2016ledger.digitalbazaar.com/
> 
> This is really good, is it open source?

Not yet. We'll release the source on Github (in the next couple of
months) like we do for Bedrock:

https://www.npmjs.com/search?q=bedrock-

... but our implementation won't be open source. There will be
components of it that /are/ open source, however. For example:

https://github.com/digitalbazaar/jsonld.js
https://github.com/digitalbazaar/jsonld-signatures

Base software libraries necessary to implement whatever experimental
standards that are created in this group will most likely be released as
open source. Things like consensus algorithms, standardized merkle tree
implementations, etc.

> If you open up a JS debug console, you can see what's sent to and 
> from the Ledger HTTP API. We'll be documenting the HTTP API over the
>  next several weeks. You can see a high-level view of it here:
> 
> http://dhs2016ledger.digitalbazaar.com/docs#_ledgers
> 
> Also excellent.  What's the thoughts on describing APIs?  One spec 
> per API, or use something like Hydra?

We're probably going to shove everything into the Flex Ledger spec and
then split the API stuff out in time if necessary (this is how JSON-LD
started). There are only 4 HTTP API endpoints necessary to implement
Flex Ledger right now, and the data structures are pretty simple.

> I have started a wiki page with the white papers and standards we'd 
> like to use.
> 
> https://github.com/project-bitmark/bitmark/wiki/White-Papers

I noticed that you're using Scrypt PoW. Have you looked into Argon2 yet?
Any thoughts on using Argon2 instead of Scrypt?

> Yes, of course. :) It could potentially be any URI and I think it 
> would be a mistake for us to pick just one.
> 
> OK!  Then better for me to raise an issue with proposal, PR?

I think the most productive thing would be this:

1. Create an issue here:
   https://github.com/web-payments/flex-ledger/issues
2. Create a PR that adds an issue marker to the spec referencing the
   issue you created. Something like:

<p class="issue" data-number="1" title="Acceptable URI formats">
ADD_SHORT_DESCRIPTION_HERE
</p>

> Will do, so we use the standard github workflow, with high level 
> discussion on the Mailing List?

Yes, please.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Rebalancing How the Web is Built
http://manu.sporny.org/2016/rebalancing/

Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2016 00:26:33 UTC