+1 to David's points. I think what Evan is pointing out though is that the discovery of the various ledgers would likely happen in the setup/application layer protocol. We can preserve the single ledger/single currency abstraction and still support the use case. On 7 March 2017 at 20:10, David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com> wrote: > > As someone who has been a dilettante on this subject for ~25 years, I > believe that the right thing to do is as follows: > > Ledgers contain accounts. Accounts can represent anything denominated in > the currency of the ledger. a "ledger supporting multicurrencies account" > must be interpreted as multiple ledgers administratively linking one > account in each to the same identity. > > The alternative destroys fungibility within the "ledger" abstraction, and > would require breaking into per-currency "subledgers" anyway, so just don't. > > > David Nicol > > > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Andrew Bransford Brown <andrewbb@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> As someone who has done the difficult thinking on this subject for ~15 >> years, >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:15 AM, Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com> wrote: >> >>> Great question. We are definitely interested in supporting cases where >>> the receiver has multiple accounts on different ledgers. The main question >>> is what layer to address this at. >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:09 PM Didier Martin <didierphmartin@hotmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> As it becomes more and more current that ledgers (from some banks) >>>> support multicurrencies accounts, >>>> >>> -- > "Have you taken yourself seriously today?" -- the gravity clown >
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2017 20:49:43 UTC