SEP-41: Clarify mint and clawback effects on total supply #1859
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
leighmcculloch
changed the title
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR clarifies the semantics of mint and clawback events in the SEP-41 Soroban Token Interface, making explicit that clawback burns tokens (reducing total supply and holder balance) and that no separate burn or transfer event accompanies a clawback event.
Changes:
- Added clarification that
mintincreases total supply and recipient balance - Added clarification that
clawbackis a type of burn that reduces both holder balance and total supply - Added requirement that implementations must increase total supply on mint and reduce it on clawback
- Updated version from 0.4.0 to 0.4.1 and added corresponding changelog entry
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
ecosystem/sep-0041.md
Outdated
| `mint`/`clawback` a new custom token. The only requirement is for `mint` and | ||
| `clawback` events to be emitted during minting and clawback actions. | ||
|
|
||
| While implementations have this flexibility to how mint and clawback are |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Grammar issue: "flexibility to how" should be "flexibility in how" or "flexibility regarding how".
Suggested change
| While implementations have this flexibility to how mint and clawback are | |
| While implementations have this flexibility in how mint and clawback are |
ecosystem/sep-0041.md
Outdated
| `clawback` events to be emitted during minting and clawback actions. | ||
|
|
||
| While implementations have this flexibility to how mint and clawback are | ||
| initiated, a mint action that emits an mint event must increase total supply, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Grammar issue: "a mint action that emits an mint event" contains an incorrect article. Should be "a mint event" instead of "an mint event".
Suggested change
| initiated, a mint action that emits an mint event must increase total supply, | |
| initiated, a mint action that emits a mint event must increase total supply, |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
burnortransferevent is emitted alongside theclawbackevent.Why
The semantics of
clawbackwere ambiguous — it was unclear whether clawback burns tokens or could transfer them, and whether a separateburnevent should accompany theclawbackevent. This was raised in #1858 (reply in thread). This change makes the behavior explicit and consistent with the Stellar Asset Contract.Thanks to @orbitlens for identifying the gap.
Close #1858