Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on May 28, 2023, 07:59:00 AM

Quote from: Jason Brendon on May 28, 2023, 02:53:05 AM

zpubs or Zpubs are bad ideas. They should not have been created. And there are plenty of misunderstandings out there.
Since zpubs or Zpubs are already for P2WPKH or P2WSH, then what's the alphabets for taproot?
People should always use xpub and descriptor.

I do agree it would have been easier to just stick to xprvs/xpubs and then specify derivation path/script type/etc. separately in order to generate the correct type of addresses, which is exactly what Core is doing with descriptors. It would avoid scenarios like this one where you have to convert Zprvs from Electrum to xprvs in order to import them in to Core.

As specified in BIP86, Taproot should use xprvs/xpubs, but there is nothing stopping software using zprvs/zpubs for Taproot. Although given that Taproot addresses can be key path or script path, then the whole Z/z separation for script hash/pubkey hash falls apart.

Would you mind editing your post to fix your misquote?

Quote from: NotATether on May 28, 2023, 04:23:51 AM

xpub is for generating the legacy 1 addresses

This is a common misconception. xprvs/xpubs are defined in BIP32, which says nothing about what type of addresses they should be used to generate. They are simply extended keys, and can be used for any address type, which is exactly what Bitcoin Core does. You are obviously right in saying that a lot of software treats xprvs/xpubs as meaning legacy addresses, but this is not strictly correct.

As I've linked to above, BIP86 uses xprvs/xpubs for Taproot, not zprvs/zpubs as you suggest.

I just fixed my misquote, really suck on this thing.

xpub is xpub, it should stick to bip32 and that's it. The others? let descriptor to handle them.

I hate all the flying around ypub Ypub, zpub, Zpub, different wallets are doing things differently. This create huge problesm when one wants to move from one wallet to another.

Electrum also does that.. which is a bad move...