Clearly define the base58 alphabet about iscc-specs HOT 5 OPEN

if the alphabets are the same, but the ordering is different, thats going to make developers very sad.

from iscc-specs.

on the call, it was suggested that base-32 will be used in the future, in which case, i suggest aligning with:

ipfs/js-ipfs#1995

from iscc-specs.

Yes base32 encoding is on its way (see: https://github.com/iscc/iscc-specs/blob/develop/iscc/codec.py#L183). The switch is planned to be included with the upcoming 1.1 release. I created a separate issue for that.

One open question is if we want to use a custom alphabet. A custom alphabet would have the advantage of providing human readable mnemonic prefixes such that ISCC component types can be recognized easily by humans. But I am not sure if it is worth to deviate from the standard alphabet to support human readability.

I am interested to hear what do others think about this!

from iscc-specs.

I'm strongly against a custom alphabet... from a developer perspective, it extra work... and I don't see it as "worth it".

You can use https://iancoleman.io/bip39/ , I would not recommend reinventing this wheel it distracts from the core value you are providing :)

from iscc-specs.

+1 to what @OR13 said, on all counts. Custom alphabet not worth it.

from iscc-specs.