{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2013-09-25\n📝 Original message:We could also say that if protocol part (https://) is missing, it's implied\nautomatically. So just:\n\nbitcoin:1abc........?r=bob.com/r/aZgR\n\nI think that's about as small as possible without re-using the pubkey as a\ntoken in the url.\n\n\nOn Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Gavin Andresen \u003cgavinandresen at gmail.com\u003ewrote:\n\n\u003e On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e BTW, on the \"make qrcodes more scannable\" front -- is it too late to\n\u003e\u003e change BIP 72 so the new param is just \"r\" instead of \"request\"? Every byte\n\u003e\u003e helps when it comes to qrcodes ...\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Not too late, assuming there are no objections. Smaller QR codes is a very\n\u003e good reason to change it.\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e --\n\u003e Gavin Andresen\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130925/342acca1/attachment.html\u003e"}