Clarification

[ennie191]

Hi

I’m working on my GSoC proposal for implementing TAP 16 and have been reviewing the discussions in #134 and #125 to ensure I fully understand the scope.

From what I gather, TAP 16 introduces snapshot Merkle trees as a replacement for the single snapshot metadata file. One point I plan to explore is whether both should be generated for compatibility or if integrations should still maintain a snapshot role with an associated key when using a Merkle tree-only approach. Additionally, I'll clarify the role of auditors since the TAP currently presents them as both required and optional in different sections.

For specifying algorithms in a POUF, I plan to propose a structured approach that ensures consistency while allowing flexibility for different implementations.

Would you say these focus areas align with what you'd like to see in the proposal, or is there anything specific I should emphasize further?
@lukpueh @JustinCappos

[JustinCappos]

I think you're aiming in a good direction here.

We're also starting to think more about how to deal with situations where some of the targets files are meant to be hidden from other users. This likely will be a minor tweak on this design and to this TAP, but I don't think the implementation here will change in any meaningful way. @mnm678

There is also definite interest in moving this TAP forward and your implementation of this will be an important step to help us move it from Draft to Accepted status.

[lukpueh]

You've already opened an issue to discuss your plans. I'll close here and reply there.