ICRC-37: Approval handling for ICRC-7 NFTs

[dietersommer]

This standard defines the approve / transfer_from paradigm for ICRC-7 NFTs. This part has been split off ICRC-7 for reasons of allowing implementations with the approve / transfer_from mechanism and to reduce size.

[skilesare]

Whoa...what happned here? I though this was 30?

[dietersommer]

WG voting on ICRC-37

This comment hosts the official vote of the Ledger & Tokenization Working Group on ICRC-37 as specified through https://github.com/dfinity/ICRC/blob/main/ICRCs/ICRC-37/ICRC-37.md.

How to vote:

React to this comment with 👍 if you agree with the ICRC-37 proposal and to bring it to an NNS vote. Leave comments regarding things you would like to still be fixed before bringing it to an NNS vote. There may still be some small things that need to be adapted after the recent refactoring.

React with 👎 and leave a comment with your objection if you oppose.

The Working Group will accept only the votes of the core members, i.e., the members regularly contributing to the WG. However, if you aren't a core working group member but have technical objections or comments to this proposal, please leave a comment. We'll try to address it according to the rough consensus model.

[sea-snake]

Compared to ICRC-2, ICRC-37 defines the icrc37_metadata method, shouldn't this ICRC-37 metadata similar to ICRC-2 metadata be simply returned in the icrc7_collection_metadata method?

Also found a few small issues and made an PR to fix these: #54

[dietersommer]

We discussed this I think and decided to have a separate method. But I also thought about exactly this when going over. Any other opinions?
Thanks for the PR, just went through and merged it.

[sea-snake]

Above has been discussed again in the ICRC-1 meeting and changes have been as a result, more details here: https://forum.dfinity.org/t/call-for-participation-nft-token-standard-working-group-status-updated/16566/186