- From: David I. Lehn <dil@lehn.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 16:13:19 -0400
- To: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
- Cc: Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>, Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADcbRRMHS+mQLPJ=XqU75WaHhbjmF-0-mYXXE92DebvhGiMhJQ@mail.gmail.com>
We extracted that forge code into a standalone package: https://github.com/digitalbazaar/base58-universal/ <https://github.com/digitalbazaar/base58-universal/blob/master/baseN.js> As far as character sets and naming, multibase just has "base58flickr" and "base58btc": https://github.com/multiformats/multibase -dave On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 3:59 PM Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries> wrote: > My experience with base58 is that it doesn't actually refer to a specific > encoding... See: > > - https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-msporny-base58-01 > - https://github.com/tuupola/base58#character-sets > > The last one has the sad truth... base58 is a family, not a specific > encoding name... > > I usually hear base58 from people who mean to say: "Base 58 with the > Bitcoin Alphabet"... > > > https://github.com/digitalbazaar/forge/blob/dd5d972b1cc6faf225afda3fc04093bd93cad16a/lib/util.js#L1569 > > If you want to never be misinterpreted, never use the term "base58" > without saying "with the bitcoin alphabet" :) ... but it's likely that when > you hear base58, you can assume "with the bitcoin alphabet". > > OS > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 2:43 PM Christopher Allen < > ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com> wrote: > >> I'm trying to get an understanding of the use of base58 and base58check >> in technical specifications (not standards), in particular, how broad the >> usage is of bae58 in the non-IETF/W3C standards based blockchain >> communities. >> >> Base58 similar to Base64 but has been modified to avoid both >> non-alphanumeric characters and letters which might look ambiguous when >> printed. Base58 achieves 73% efficiency. Like Base64URL, it avoids conflict >> with URI reserved characters, but it doesn't seem to say anything about >> forbidding line-break characters (but I've never seen linebreaks in a >> base58). >> >> It has been argued: "We reject Base58 and Base58Check (for use in a URI) >> due to their lack of widespread adoption." >> >> But just because the IETF and W3C standards communities this is true, >> isn't necessarily a sufficient argument that it lacks "widespread >> adoption". >> >> — Christopher Allen >> > > > -- > *ORIE STEELE* > Chief Technical Officer > www.transmute.industries > > <https://www.transmute.industries> >
Received on Friday, 24 April 2020 20:13:43 UTC