Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Neokry
@neokry
Is ERC-5192 the current standard to use for SBTs? Haven't heard much on its use at all and wanted to double check
4 replies
2 recasts
3 reactions
Dan Finlay 🦊
@danfinlay
My fav had been 5114 but also never saw anyone do it. I think the paper was tldr for most people, they just wanted an EIP.
0 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
woj — q/dau
@woj.eth
essentially yes, but i've never seen the locked / unlocked in action sbts didn't get much traction and most popular implementations are just erc-721s with transfer function that always reverts example here: https://davbarrick.medium.com/how-we-built-the-buildspace-nft-contract-1dc8b81a3b4f
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
timdaub (🥝,🎩)
@timdaub.eth
OpenSea has support for the locked and unlock events
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
J. Valeska 🦊🎩
@j-valeska
I am not sure since I didn't read the erc5192 but I am always create SBTs overriding the _beforeTokenTransfer function. The idea is allow only minting and burning requiring: from == address(0) || to == address(0) This way, all transfers will fail. (I am going to read the ERC5192 now)
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
