Very minor API change. This would essentially bake p2pkh into the API itself. C1 would be provided in the signature struct while a hash of C1 would be passed around on a higher level. The verification step ensures hash(sig.C1) == hC1.
This just seems nicer as it's less data to pass around. This seems useful for more generalized usages of this protocol. For example, someone could easily publish a tweet with hC1 in it. They couldn't do the same if they're required to deal only with C1.
Very minor API change. This would essentially bake p2pkh into the API itself. C1 would be provided in the signature struct while a hash of C1 would be passed around on a higher level. The verification step ensures
hash(sig.C1) == hC1.This just seems nicer as it's less data to pass around. This seems useful for more generalized usages of this protocol. For example, someone could easily publish a tweet with hC1 in it. They couldn't do the same if they're required to deal only with C1.