Bumblefudge

Sorry, can you say more? I tried it in two different browsers and it seems to work just fine in both after clicking the "Open Sandbox" button.

On call we agreed to just use the current spruce prototype from demo.spruce for now

> [](https://chainagnostic.org/CAIPs/caip-222) > > Why restrict such an important pattern like "Connect + Sign" to only EVM wallets? I would tend to agree that having a multi-VM/multi-L1 syntax for every...

I have heard of people using it recently in the Solid community, whose charter was just accepted as a working group this week, so I would imagine this spec will...

@llbartekll @jakubuid @pedrouid + anyone else following 5792 prototyping at ReOwn - approvey approvey before 5792 goes to last call so I can update the commit-specific link IN EIP-5792?

OK i just added it in the commit above to match the open PR you linked to, although I'm still confused why the other capabilties are: ` { "supported": true...

> should this be allowed?: lol no that was a typo on my part, thank you for not making me feel more embarassed than I need to

> we need an address (caip10), because wallets can have many addresses on given chain and some of them could support atomic batches and the others not Oh sorry, I...

Hey @daira , this is worrisome to hear! Would a simple wordsmithing PR address the Resolution Method section? As for the 32hex digit hashes, which BIP122 chains use a different...

oh god you're totally right, i forgot that the REQUEST specifies a wallet, and optionally chains, and the response specifies chains (with the per-address implicit). yeah modeling this inside CAIP-25...