Closed HardlyDifficult closed 5 years ago
Also review other popular NFTs to see what metadata they leverage and how
This is a great point. Since we now have ERC721 full support, maybe we should plan an upgrade to our deployed smart contract to see if this works better?
Yes, we should probably plan for an upgrade. But for this, I believe we could test it before then - e.g. with Metamask I could point to the local ganache and see how things look. I have not tried this yet though.
related to this we should answer if we want to ERC165 register support the the ERC721 metadata extension.
I think this will require deploying our latests smart contract to see how "compatible" they are with a list of the most popular crypto wallets, but ideally also market places such as opensea and rarebits.
I just wanted to start keeping track of this stuff somewhere. Here's a link to a doc I created for this purpose;
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bN0YvOcK1nCHRzBthC_0CNq5H3YpxMJ3NV7LTsh1iLQ/edit#
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. When viewing a Lock or a Key on a blockexplorer or in a wallet, what information might the wallet try reading from the contract in order to make that a good experience for users?
Describe the solution you'd like We should review any plans regarding ERC721 in wallets such as Metamask, Fortmatic, Portis. Do they look for standard metadata fields? as an example
Describe alternatives you've considered n/a
Additional context Etherscan recently added ERC721 with name, description, and icon - although that info may be gathered off-chain like source code is today.