Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CIP-0030: API to enumerate avilable wallets #253

Open
rosieks opened this issue May 6, 2022 · 5 comments
Open

CIP-0030: API to enumerate avilable wallets #253

rosieks opened this issue May 6, 2022 · 5 comments

Comments

@rosieks
Copy link

rosieks commented May 6, 2022

Please provide API to enumerate wallets available for dApp. Right now the only way is to iterate over properties in window.cardano but this lead to duplicated entries if you have Eternl installed as due to avoid breaking changes to existing apps it's exposed twice via: window.cardano.ccvault and window.cardano.eternl

@rosieks rosieks changed the title CIP-30: API to enumerate avilable wallets CIP-0030: API to enumerate avilable wallets May 6, 2022
@Mercurial
Copy link
Contributor

@rosieks
Copy link
Author

rosieks commented May 17, 2022

I do something similar but then ccvault/eternl is twice as it's exposed as window.cardano.ccvault and window.cardano.eternl. And yoroi is not there as they don't have icon property - but maybe that's actually good because they are missing a lot of APIs

@GGAlanSmithee
Copy link

I do something similar - but much less accurate - https://github.com/GGAlanSmithee/use-cardano/blob/main/src/hooks/use-wallet-providers.tsx#L17. I think this issue is valid, what would the path be to move this to an actual CIP or ammendment? Just make a CPS?

@rphair
Copy link
Collaborator

rphair commented Dec 4, 2022

@GGAlanSmithee the last resolution of the CIP editors (it was back when minutes were still being transcribed into the repo, so you can probably find it) was for additional features for CIP-0030 to be submitted as CIPs with new numbers, because (as I remember; @KtorZ may remember in more detail or correct me if I'm wrong):

  1. the CIP-0030 document was getting too big
  2. tagging additional features for the API with CIP numbers would provide a convenient way of indicating support for a new feature set (i.e. indicating "supports CIP-0XXX" rather than having to describe the feature)

I don't work in this area so I can't advise about the right way of enumerating the available wallets. If there is a straightforward implementation that everyone can agree on quickly to do that, it should definitely be a CIP (with a Path to Active that drives adoption by wallets) rather than a CPS (with only a vague incentive for wallets to support the enumeration somehow).

(edit, p.s.: some of this may also apply to your last posting in #151 (comment))

@GGAlanSmithee
Copy link

@rphair many thanks for your quick reply. I will try to move this to a CIP then, since I think it could easily be done in the bridge API itself with introspection, much like @Mercurial does it.

Regarding #151 I'm a bit more hesitant because I am not a wallet provider, but rather a consumer and idk the implications for the different implementations. As a consumer, i like how nami does it though.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants
@Mercurial @rosieks @rphair @GGAlanSmithee and others