feat: Erc1155MetadataUri extension
#416
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for contracts-stylus canceled.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Left some comments. I believe, this extension should be treated as introduction to URIStorage; as we have for Metadata & URI Storage extensions for ERC-721.
| @@ -0,0 +1,75 @@ | |||
| = ERC-1155 Metadata URI | |||
|
|
|||
| The OpenZeppelin xref:erc1155.adoc[ERC-1155] Metadata URI extension is needed to manage and store URIs for individual tokens. This extension allows each token to have its own unique URI, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Make use of this docs -> https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1155#metadata-extensions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let me know what you think, see cfe28f5
| [[usage]] | ||
| == Usage | ||
|
|
||
| In order to make an xref:erc1155.adoc[ERC-1155] token with https://docs.rs/openzeppelin-stylus/0.2.0-alpha/openzeppelin_stylus/token/erc1155/extensions/metadata_uri/index.html[Metadata URI] flavour, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wrong version in the link, may not work in CI jobs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should I omit the URL altogether for now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Try with 0.2.0-alpha.2 (this version will include Metadata URI extension) and check if CI passes.
| fn uri(&self, id: U256) -> String; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // FIXME: Apply multi-level inheritance to export Metadata's functions. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need this comment here? I am not sure as we do not re-export anything here.
| [[usage]] | ||
| == Usage | ||
|
|
||
| In order to make an xref:erc1155.adoc[ERC-1155] token with https://docs.rs/openzeppelin-stylus/0.2.0-alpha/openzeppelin_stylus/token/erc1155/extensions/metadata_uri/index.html[Metadata URI] flavour, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Try with 0.2.0-alpha.2 (this version will include Metadata URI extension) and check if CI passes.
| #[public] | ||
| #[inherit(Erc1155, Erc1155MetadataUri)] | ||
| impl Erc1155Example { | ||
| pub fn mint( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe we do not need to have mint and mint_batch fns in docs for Metadata URI extension. I would say that it should be enough:
#[public]
#[inherit(Erc1155, Erc1155MetadataUri)]
impl Erc1155Example {
// ...
}Like for Erc20 Metadata.
| let _contract = Erc1155::new(contract_addr, &alice.wallet); | ||
| let contract_addr = alice | ||
| .as_deployer() | ||
| .with_constructor(ctr(URI)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would suggest adding with_default_constructor() as we have e.g. in Erc20; Applies to all E2E tests here.
Resolves #364
PR Checklist