Update sns token's transaction page to fit icp's one

Hello !

While been listed on some exchanges, we had the ask provide a frontend page to show transactions, using transactions hash instead of block index.
I imagine dfinity had also this demand in the past, as :
https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/transaction/ use transaction hash and not blockindex, and you can access transaction detail directly using transaction hash.
But for some reason, sns tokens transaction page does not fit with that, and use block index : ORIGYN (OGY) Transactions - ICP Dashboard
Can you guys change it and use transaction hash instead of block index ?

For now, we are providing a custom solution using our own dashboard, but for sure others sns tokens will face the issue in near futur, and to help dfinity’s tokens to be listed on exchange this is very important.

Thanks a lot!

1 Like

Hi @Gwojda, an ICRC-1 transaction hash is not necessarily unique, nor is an ICP transaction hash. For some ICP transaction hashes, hundreds of transactions have the same hash, so it was perhaps not the best decision for the ICP Dashboard to follow the lead of etherscan in 2021 and index ICP transactions by transaction hash. For ICRC-1 tokens such as SNS and ck tokens, we decided not to repeat the same mistake of indexing by the transaction hash.

Here is an example of a single ICP transaction hash that is used by over 48,000 ICP transactions:

Can you be more specific about the request from exchanges regarding using the (possibly not unique) transaction hash instead of the (unique) block/transaction index? Do they provide a reason that they can’t use the block/transaction index? Do they only wish to link to outgoing transactions which they create (and thus they have the ability to increase the chance that the transaction hash is unique by setting the “created at” timestamp), or do they also wish to link to incoming transactions (in which case they have no control over the creation of the transaction and there may be hundreds of transactions with the same hash)? What behavior do they expect to see when they link to a non-unique transaction hash without also specifying the block/transaction index?

1 Like