Dr. Maxim Orlovsky

If we clearly see use of uncompressed keys as a bad practice, why we should not just update both standards specifying that non-compressed keys will be non-standard application for both...

They may continue doing so, but as a non-standard behavior. The idea of being "Standard" is about what devs will expect from API by default. It does not limit devs...

I will write a proposal to bitcoin-dev taking @apoelstra as a starting point over the holidays - and after discussion there will update this PR

@luke-jr BIP-174 allows adding new fields in a backward-compatible manner: > The Partially Signed Transaction format can be extended in the future by adding new types for key-value pairs. Backwards...

Updated proposal posted to bitcoin-dev mail list: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-January/019761.html After discussion there I will update this PR with the proposal

@apoelstra, @achow101 did a PR here with a new BIP proposal https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1293.

I assume once #1293 will get merged this one still to be added to the main PSBT BIPs (I will update it then)

Asking @achow101 to review

Kindly pining @achow101 to review. This is a stuff we briefly discussed with @apoelstra, basing also on his ideas, so his review is also highly appreciated.

@luke-jr whom do you think we need to review this PR before getting it merged?