docs(adr): ADR-050 SIGN_MODE_TEXTUAL

[amaury1093]

Rendered ADR

Description

Closes: #6513

Support documents:

• context: Specify SIGN_MODE_TEXTUAL #6513
• specification living doc HackmD: https://hackmd.io/7RkGfv_rQAaZzEigUYhcXw

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• included the correct type prefix in the PR title
• added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
• provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
• followed the guidelines for building modules
• included the necessary unit and integration tests
• added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
• included comments for documenting Go code
• updated the relevant documentation or specification
• reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
• confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic
• reviewed API design and naming
• reviewed documentation is accurate
• reviewed tests and test coverage
• manually tested (if applicable)

[zmanian]

Ethereum is working on a similar EIP

ethereum/EIPs#4430

[alexanderbez]

Excellent ADR @AmauryM 👏

[robert-zaremba]

if there is a big number, how a user will know the value if we can't scroll and can't break lines?

[robert-zaremba]

up, this is still a concern.

[amaury1093]

Addressed. The proposed way is to do best effort:

• if small number, no problem
• if big number, then show it on separate line
• if huge number (rare case), show it on multiple screens

[robert-zaremba]

maybe we can have an exponential notation? For example, instead 12300000000000000 we write 1.23e18

[amaury1093]

I think there's another thread with scientific notation. My opinion:

• it's IMO not known enough by people with non-scientific background. You never see this notation in bank/finance for example.
• 1234567890 would be written as 1,23456789e9, which is actually longer

[webmaster128]

I agree. I studied math and CS and consider this e notation unreadable in any financial context.

[robert-zaremba]

I think it would be good to have some shortcuts. For common Ethereum based coins (with 1e18 base) it will be difficult to read even if we use _ or ' every 3 or 6 digits.

[webmaster128]

Don't we have display respresentations to solve this such that amounts are dispplayed in ETH instead of Wei anyways?

[amaury1093]

I think the concern here is that we always display in the display denom, even if it doesn't make sense.

Take 20Wei, and the display denom is ETH. Textual will display 0.00000000000000002 ETH, even though 20 Wei is way more readable.

Maybe an idea is to display in the denom with the shortest string length.

[amaury1093]

I think all comments have been addressed!

Is anyone willing to give a second approval, and then I'll merge this? We can still iterate as part of the WG. cc @webmaster128 @zmanian @JimLarson @jleni @robert-zaremba

[robert-zaremba]

pre-approving. left few additional comments.

[webmaster128]

I'm working on the implementation of Timestamp now.

I think what we want is RFC 3339. ISO8601 is a superset of that which does way too much for our needs. It does fun stuff like PT24H which is now until 24 hours later.

Also it is important to perseve nanosecond precision. Otherwise we loose information. Some more detail on how fractional seconds are displayed would be useful.

[amaury1093]

I think RFC3339 doesn't deal with nanos, right? I found an informal RFC3339Nano in Golang, which is RFC3339+ns support, but no official spec. That seems like exactly what we want though.

The next superset seems to be ISO8601 itself.

[webmaster128]

There are various mentions of "fraction" in RFC3339. The grammar time-secfrac = "." 1*DIGIT means at least one digit after a period. My understanding so far has been that any precision is supported.

[amaury1093]

Ah I see! OK that's nice, I'll update the ADR and add an example with fractional seconds.