Update ERC-7930 and ERC-7828: Restructuring and Separation of Concerns
Hey everyone, we want to share an important update on the restructuring of these standards. We’re updating the forum discussions for both ERC-7930 and ERC-7828 to keep the community informed on our progress.
New Structure
We reorganized the responsibilities between the two ERCs:
| Standard | Purpose |
|---|---|
| ERC-7930 | Binary machine-friendly format to reference an address on a specific chain |
| ERC-7828 | Human-friendly name resolution to Interoperable Addresses, using ENS |
Summary of Changes
ERC-7930:
- Removed the Interoperable Name definition (now lives in ERC-7828)
- Added a section on text representation in user-facing contexts
- Simplified the ERC making it more specific and straightforward for developers
ERC-7828:
- Incorporated the Interoperable Name definition
- Discussing specifications to achieve a coherent ERC
CAIP-350 (awaiting CASA review):
- Removed “Interoperable Name” references, replaced with “text representation”
- Added a “Chain Identifier Text Representation” section with the standard format
<namespace>:<chainReference>and update templeta and profiles
Current Status
- ERC-7930 is in draft and will soon move to review
- ERC-7828 is entering a new phase of discussion and iteration. We’re working to make the ERC complete, coherent, and easy to understand
Topics Under Discussion
- Checksums: Whether they should be part of the ERC, how to compute them, and when to display them to users
- Versioning: Defining compatibility constraints between ERC-7828 and ERC-7930
- General specifications: Reviewing clarity and consistency across different sections
We’d love to hear more perspectives from the community!
Next Steps
- Move forward quickly with ERC-7828 while ERC-7930 heads to review
- Continue iterating with community feedback