ERC-5679 Mint and Burn Tokens

Hi all, I am proposing a new ERC to extend the ERC-20, ERC-721 and ERC-1155 with ability to Mint and Burn.

See the ERC here EIP-5679: Token Minting and Burning

Your feedback is appreciated.

Reference Implementations Version 0x1002

https://goerli.etherscan.io/address/0x72D9c2D49F5A2915D7A3c23B1FD5d645dFe492ac#code
https://goerli.etherscan.io/address/0x8965B739DF91eB621D9FF06af4A48198f711BbD9#code
https://goerli.etherscan.io/address/0xE45072F6ee31cBE07FC232f61c61C6Bd000d9ea2#code

1 Like

I find this proposal very applaudable, especially as I had been calling out not standardizing mint and burn in a previous post on this forum: EIP-4973 - Account-bound Tokens - #129 by TimDaub

However, I think the proposal would be stronger if it rigorously created separate documents for EIP-721, EIP-1155, and EIP-20’s mint functions. E.g., I have no knowledge whatsoever about EIP-1155 and only very limited knowledge about EIP-20. Hence, although I’d like to help you review and improve the document, my knowledge is mainly in EIP-721 - but I don’t feel like being able to make suggestions for the lack of the other standard document’s inclusion.

Still, thanks for taking this on, I think it’s an important step in the right direction!

1 Like

Thank you for the feedback @TimDaub
I was thinking of the same thing. I hesitate because there is also ways to devide this EIP to more finegrain, e.g. by EIP-20Mint EIP-20Burn, EIP-721Mint, EIP-721Burn etc. And it seems harder for implementers to understand they actually are the same standard and shall follow the same behavior. So, while I am open or even weakly lean towards agreeing with you, let’s wait for other community members to see what they think, WDYT?

In the meanwhile, it’d be great if you could start reviewing it it from EIP-721 perspective

1 Like