search

ConsenSysMesh / web3studio-bootleg

The Shared Royalty Non-Fungible Token (a.k.a Bootleg) is an open source project started by the ConsenSys Web3Studio team. The purpose of the Shared Royalty Non-Fungible Token (SRNFT) is to make any royalty business model, from the oil and gas industry to entertainment, easy to manage with the Ethereum blockchain .
https://consensys.net/web3studio/bootleg/
Apache License 2.0
91 stars 30 forks source link

Review existing ERCs #27

Closed brian-lc closed 5 years ago

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Overview

As an ERC designer, so I understand how ERCs are structured review existing ERCs and how they are defined.

Reference

-EIP20 document -OpenZeppelin ERC -From Consensys, EIP20

Assumptions

Acceptance

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

This is an interesting one https://blog.enjincoin.io/erc-1155-the-crypto-item-standard-ac9cf1c5a226

You can mint crypto items https://mint.enjin.io/ Targeted at gaming but has some overlap to bootleg

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Worth reading, take a look at this... https://medium.com/loom-network/how-to-code-your-own-cryptokitties-style-game-on-ethereum-7c8ac86a4eb3

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Thanks to this article there are a few more ERCS to review https://medium.com/@OpenLawOfficial/modernizing-art-with-blockchains-6cba4694833d

https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/888 https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/998 https://github.com/ethereum/eips/issues/1155

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Divisible NFTs sounds like our owership/royalty provenance concept on some level https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/864

It raises the question around the fungibilityof the royalty share. Could an owner sell their ownership stake to another owner... ownership buyout. Where is that exchange managed as part of the smart contract?

Comment thread points to this re-fungible token https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/1634

In that thread this sentence caught my eye" ARTBLX Inc. is working towards facilitating a protocol for collective ownership of physical, digital and conceptual artworks. "

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Delegated non-fungible https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/994

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

I drawed a drawing https://www.lucidchart.com/invitations/accept/2b383749-a557-478f-a0e2-f3ee008e4af2

It has some gaps but we'll fill those in over time

Bootleg - Key Components (1).png

barlock commented 5 years ago

Could you add a rough 1-sentence description of all of the ERC's referenced? I'm not sure what multi-dimensional means in this context.

I'm also curious which ERCs you considered and throw out and why (1155 comes to mind).

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Thanks for the feedback. To be clear, nothing has been thrown out. Thrown out, in my mind, means explicitly would not work. ERC 1155 may well fit into the fractional owner functional block in some way. I'll note it there.

I'll also add a short index of ERC numbers and their simple summary to my write up.

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Here's a draft of the ERC glossary:

ERC-721 - The Non-fungible token, a.k.a the lifeblood of the CryptoKitty. Likely to be identified as the idea that eventually led to downfall of humanity after gen0 CryptoKitties become the first chain-based artificial life form. ERC-20 - The OG fungible token. Needs no introduction. The basis for all Eth based coin. This token is used as a convenient way for CryptoKitties to own humans themselves... because in the eyes of our CryptoKitty masters, humans are (for the most part) fungible. ERC-998 - Composable Non-fungible tokens. Created because our CrptyoKitty overlords wanted to own nice hats. This ERC enables NFT tokens to "own" other fungible and non-fungible tokens. ERC-1155 - Bundled tokens. Similar to 998 but not exactly since there is no "ownership" concept. This token allows CryptoKitties to sell "bags of humans" to each other without burning all that gas ("gas", which was renamed to CryptNip so kitties could better grasp the concept). ERC-1633 - The re-fungible shared ownership token. As it turns out, some humans are quite valuable to the CryptoKitty overlords (someone has to keep the computers running). For these rare humans CryptoKities use ERC-1633 so that they can share the high cost of specialty humans across multiple owners. ERC-864 - Divisible non-fungible tokens. This token is typically used as part of the CrytpoKitty marriage contract to define shared ownership of all the assets a CryptoKitty couple might acquire throughout their time together (which is infinite). Humans previously referred to this as a "pre-nup." In most marriages the shares are 50/50 split but for some of the high net-worth gen0 Kittos they might want to consider other percentages to minimize asset loss in case of a divorce.

Other tokens which have shown to have minimal interest to CryptoKitties: ERC-888 - Multi-dimensional tokens. So similar to 864 that it really raises the question "why do we actually need this?" ERC-1203 - Closed since it is covered by 1155. ERC-1178 - Merged? This is also similar to 1155 but some still complain that 1155 is too complex (namely the folks who proposed 1178). It also doesn't reflect the "nuance[s]" required to define multiple classes of tokens within one token contract.

barlock commented 5 years ago

👏 I enjoyed that.

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Quobands seems interesting and similar in some ways https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Papers.cfm?abstract_id=3107645

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

Updated diagram.... bootleg - token composition

brian-lc commented 5 years ago

good article about re-fungibillybills... er, I mean tokens. https://medium.com/@billyrennekamp/re-fungible-token-rft-297003592769

fulldecent commented 5 years ago

721 also includes metadata protocol, as does the 0xcert protocol (which is an extension)