Refactor x/collection,token proto #3

0Tech · 2022-12-06T11:25:05Z

Description

Changes applied (the list is not exhaustive):

Do not use past tense in the event proto.
Use Attribute for Modify and the corresponding events.
Change field names:
- All the uri variants -> uri
- contract_id -> id (where it's obvious in the context)
- id -> contract_id, class_id (where it's ambiguous)
- from -> operator (on mint)
- owner -> operator (on burn)
- from -> grantee or granter (on grant & renounce)
Replace TokenClass into Contract because the contents of its id is a contract id (x/token).
Prefer following names in the services:
- Operator variants over From variants
- Send variants over Transfer variants
- AuthorizeOperator variants over Approve variants

Motivation and context

How has this been tested?

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Checklist:

I followed the contributing guidelines and code of conduct.
I have added a relevant changelog to CHANGELOG.md
I have added tests to cover my changes.
I have updated the documentation accordingly.
I have updated API documentation client/docs/swagger-ui/swagger.yaml

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T14:37:19Z

proto/lbm/collection/v1/tx.proto

-  // base img uri is an uri for the contract image stored off chain.
-  string base_img_uri = 3;
+  // uri for the resource of the contract stored off chain.
+  string uri = 3;


I guess the following comment also needs to be modified.

// - `base_img_uri` exceeds the app-specific limit in length.

https://github.com/line/lbm-sdk/blob/v0.46.0/proto/lbm/collection/v1/tx.proto#L360

The comment would be removed in the subsequent PR, in favor of codespaced errors.

Please refer: Finschia#849

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T14:39:03Z

proto/lbm/collection/v1/tx.proto

@@ -603,14 +603,14 @@ message MsgModify {
  // changes to apply.
  // on modifying collection: name, base_img_uri, meta.


Suggested change

// on modifying collection: name, base_img_uri, meta.

// on modifying collection: name, uri, meta.

It's better to unify the terms into uri.

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T14:44:58Z

proto/lbm/collection/v1/event.proto

@@ -74,10 +74,10 @@ enum AttributeKey {
  ATTRIBUTE_KEY_NEW_ROOT_TOKEN_ID = 19 [(gogoproto.enumvalue_customname) = "AttributeKeyNewRoot"];


Does enum AttributeKey affect legacy events?
If not, I guess the following definition should be modified into ATTRIBUTE_KEY_URI and AttributeKeyURI. (Possibly AttributeKeyUri is better?)

ATTRIBUTE_KEY_BASE_IMG_URI = 8 [(gogoproto.enumvalue_customname) = "AttributeKeyBaseImgURI"];

It does. So we would better not touch it.

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T14:52:10Z

proto/lbm/token/v1/tx.proto

-  // image_uri is an uri for the image of the token class stored off chain.
-  string image_uri = 3;
+  // uri for the resource of the token class stored off chain.
+  string uri = 3;


I guess the following comment also needs to be modified.

// - `image_uri` exceeds the app-specific limit in length.

https://github.com/line/lbm-sdk/blob/v0.46.0/proto/lbm/token/v1/tx.proto#L239

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T14:54:18Z

proto/lbm/token/v1/event.proto

@@ -51,10 +51,10 @@ enum AttributeKey {
  ATTRIBUTE_KEY_PROXY       = 14 [(gogoproto.enumvalue_customname) = "AttributeKeyProxy"];


Does enum AttributeKey affect legacy events?
If not, I guess the following definition should be modified into ATTRIBUTE_KEY_URI and AttributeKeyURI. (Possibly AttributeKeyUri is better?)

ATTRIBUTE_KEY_IMG_URI = 8 [(gogoproto.enumvalue_customname) = "AttributeKeyImageURI"];

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T15:03:34Z

proto/lbm/token/v1/tx.proto

  // contract id associated with the contract.
  string contract_id = 1;
  // the address of the grantee which must have modify permission.
-  string owner = 2;
+  string operator = 2;
  // changes to apply.


Could you explain possible attribute keys in the comment, so that client developers accurately know them?

For example,

// changes to apply. // Possible keys: uri, meta, ......... repeated Attribute changes = 3 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];

Note that the comment of message MsgModify is already providing such information.
https://github.com/line/lbm-sdk/blob/v0.46.0/proto/lbm/collection/v1/tx.proto#L603-L605

I added the information.

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T15:19:50Z

proto/lbm/collection/v1/event.proto

@@ -248,10 +248,10 @@ message EventModifiedContract {
  repeated Attribute changes = 3 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];


How about explaining possible keys of changes like the following?

// changes of the attributes applied. // The possible attribute keys are same as the possible keys of `changes` in `message MsgModify`. repeated Attribute changes = 3 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T15:21:24Z

proto/lbm/collection/v1/event.proto

@@ -264,10 +264,10 @@ message EventModifiedTokenClass {
  string type_name = 5;
 }


Ditto, how about explaining possible keys of changes like the following?

// changes of the attributes applied. // The possible attribute keys are same as the possible keys of `changes` in `message MsgModify`. repeated Attribute changes = 4 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T15:22:01Z

proto/lbm/collection/v1/event.proto

@@ -278,10 +278,10 @@ message EventModifiedNFT {
  repeated Attribute changes = 4 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];


Ditto, how about explaining possible keys of changes like the following?

// changes of the attributes applied. // The possible attribute keys are same as the possible keys of `changes` in `message MsgModify`. repeated Attribute changes = 4 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-03T15:24:35Z

proto/lbm/token/v1/event.proto

 //
 // Since: 0.46.0 (finschia)
-message EventModified {
+message EventModifyContract {
  // contract id associated with the token class.
  string contract_id = 1;
  // address which triggered the modify.
  string operator = 2;
  // changes on the metadata of the class.


Ditto, how about explaining possible keys of changes like the following?

// changes on the metadata of the class. // The possible attribute keys are same as the possible keys of `changes` in `message MsgModifyContract`. repeated Attribute changes = 3 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];

ryu1-sakai · 2023-01-11T15:17:03Z

It seems that the term "proxy" is still being used in the following tx messages.

MsgOperatorBurnFT
MsgOperatorBurnNFT
MsgOperatorAttach
MsgOperatorDetach

Shall we rename them to "operator" if we make the decision to adopt the term "operator"?

0Tech added 2 commits December 6, 2022 08:56

Refactor x/token proto

10620a7

Refactor x/collection proto

11c92c6

ryu1-sakai reviewed Jan 3, 2023

View reviewed changes

0Tech added 2 commits January 4, 2023 10:27

Modify comment

f7e07c7

Revert changes on token_type

6e76ea7

0Tech force-pushed the proto branch from 6bb003f to 6e76ea7 Compare January 4, 2023 10:46

Rename a fieid to token_type

efbbd1f

0Tech closed this Jan 19, 2023

0Tech deleted the proto branch February 13, 2023 01:25

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Refactor x/collection,token proto #3

Refactor x/collection,token proto #3

0Tech commented Dec 6, 2022 •

edited

Loading

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

Loading

0Tech Jan 4, 2023

0Tech Jan 4, 2023

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023

0Tech Jan 4, 2023

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

Loading

0Tech Jan 4, 2023

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023

ryu1-sakai commented Jan 11, 2023

		@@ -603,14 +603,14 @@ message MsgModify {
		// changes to apply.
		// on modifying collection: name, base_img_uri, meta.

	// on modifying collection: name, base_img_uri, meta.
	// on modifying collection: name, uri, meta.

		@@ -74,10 +74,10 @@ enum AttributeKey {
		ATTRIBUTE_KEY_NEW_ROOT_TOKEN_ID = 19 [(gogoproto.enumvalue_customname) = "AttributeKeyNewRoot"];

		@@ -51,10 +51,10 @@ enum AttributeKey {
		ATTRIBUTE_KEY_PROXY = 14 [(gogoproto.enumvalue_customname) = "AttributeKeyProxy"];

		@@ -248,10 +248,10 @@ message EventModifiedContract {
		repeated Attribute changes = 3 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];

		@@ -264,10 +264,10 @@ message EventModifiedTokenClass {
		string type_name = 5;
		}

		@@ -278,10 +278,10 @@ message EventModifiedNFT {
		repeated Attribute changes = 4 [(gogoproto.nullable) = false];

Refactor x/collection,token proto #3

Refactor x/collection,token proto #3

Conversation

0Tech commented Dec 6, 2022 • edited Loading

Description

Motivation and context

How has this been tested?

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Checklist:

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ryu1-sakai commented Jan 11, 2023

0Tech commented Dec 6, 2022 •

edited

Loading

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ryu1-sakai Jan 3, 2023 •

edited

Loading