I noticed yesterday the tag private-key-format. Given that wallet-import-format already exists and has three times more questions, should the two be combined in some form? Is one of them a subset of the other, or are the two topics distinct in some regard? Should private-key-format and wallet-import-format be merged?
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
To me, private-key-format is a superset of wallet-import-format as WIF is a private key format, but other private key formats such as xprv are not. However tagging WIF questions as both is probably not useful, and we tag questions about the other private key formats as such. Then we could remove private-key-format, although I would prefer to keep it as catch-all for questions about a private key format which is not known.
-
1I think as a catch all, just
private-keywould suffice - if someone doesn't know the format, they also might not know that the piece of information they're missing is the format. However, you generally would know that you're dealing with a private key Oct 19, 2020 at 2:24 -
@RaghavSood: Folding everything into private-key sounds like a valid third option. Perhaps you should make that an answer. :)– Murch ModOct 19, 2020 at 17:53
Personally, I would assume that private-key-format is a superset, covering WIFs, mini keys (such as from Casascius coins), unencoded keys ("My script says this key is wrong!!!" -> "Because it should be a byte array, not a string"), potentially even xprvs.
That said, the utility in maintaining it as a separate tag, as opposed to having dedicated tags for the mini private key format and letting BIP32/44 cover xprv seems low.
I vote for merging.
-
So, to clarify, you suggest that we merge everything into private-key-format?– Murch ModOct 19, 2020 at 2:11
-
Ah, no - I'm suggesting we merge private-key-format into wallet-import-format, and retag extended key questions to be under the relevant BIP tags, as well as start a mini-private-key tag to handle those questions. Happy to help with the retagging efforts Oct 19, 2020 at 2:23