I am not a programmer but would love to get some info (maybe form a dev) on how complex the code is for minting, I have a guy who says they will take this on board for my project but i am thinking I might want to do it myself, is there a guide for this or is it to early ?
This is assuming you are talking about babylon release. Typically in other chains, there are standards and metadata structures you have to adhere to in order to integrate with marketplaces. While creating the NFT is simple enough in scrypto, the standards have not been agreed yet as this stands on possibly the first few that release an NFT marketplace or that the team has created a standard natively. So it may possibly too early to tell but you can do all the development now taking into account that implementation might change
2 Likes
I really hope there is a set standard prior to Babylon so marketplaces aren’t able to lock their customers into one place. This is an area where I think you see forced centralization in a space where most people are supposed to be pro decentralization. Marketplaces will mint NFTs with specs specific to their marketplace, so if you want to sell somewhere else, you can’t.
The process of minting itself is pretty straightforward on almost every chain. If you look at the Near protocol dev docs, you can mint your own NFT fairly easily. It will show up in your wallet, and you can send it to whoever you want, but it won’t show up in any of the more prominent marketplaces because you didn’t mint it through their platform. That sucks.
I would like to see the ability to mint anywhere, and then sell anywhere. As long as the NFT is tied to a single creator wallet address, or if the collection is assigned a unique identifier with all NFTs for that collection minted under that identifier only. That way you can verify authenticity. It would also be nice if you could mint after you store your metadata on either Arweave or IPFS. I’d like to pay my storage fees up front on Arweave instead of having to use a pinning service like Pinata on IPFS.
I’m really hoping the NFTs will just be a modified implementation of the native Radix token. You could create your “Collection Name” which will be assigned an RRI, just like a new token is now. Then you’ll be able to create new tokens under that RRI as needed, or all at once, with the option to make them burnable or not. Since the NFT is based on the native token, transacting with them will be trivial because all of the hard work was already done. Send an NFT just like you would XRD, super easy and super fast. But, time will tell which direction they actually take. I’m definitely keeping an eye on this aspect of the project.
3 Likes
Agreed on all points except the collection name. A more generic term should be used, not every NFT is part of a collection.
Yeah, for sure. You could call it whatever you want. But every NFT would have to be assigned to some sort of designator, be it a wallet address, RRI, or something else. The whole purpose is make it easy for buyers/sellers to trace the creation of the NFT back to that verified address, and for it to be sold across multiple marketplaces easily.
Yes I am sur radix are trying to think this throught, @Vlad is working on NFT market place where the service should be included, in the future every NFT site will have a mint fucntion, Stashhh already does I would like to see how easy it is to use