gnunet-svn
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[taler-docs] branch master updated: First commit of the translation for


From: gnunet
Subject: [taler-docs] branch master updated: First commit of the translation for the fee schedule (inserted into subchapter 'discussion')
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2021 12:34:04 +0100

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

skuegel pushed a commit to branch master
in repository docs.

The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
     new f2ee48e  First commit of the translation for the fee schedule 
(inserted into subchapter 'discussion')
f2ee48e is described below

commit f2ee48e60a5d120abe301fb4015b020964cc34c6
Author: Stefan K├╝gel <skuegel@web.de>
AuthorDate: Mon Jan 4 12:32:35 2021 +0100

    First commit of the translation for the fee schedule (inserted into 
subchapter 'discussion')
---
 design-documents/008-fees.rst | 18 +++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/design-documents/008-fees.rst b/design-documents/008-fees.rst
index 331d6cd..a3d5ca6 100644
--- a/design-documents/008-fees.rst
+++ b/design-documents/008-fees.rst
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ Design Doc 008: Fee Structure Metrics
 Summary
 =======
 
-We discuss criterea for evaluating an exchange's denomination and fee 
structure.
+We discuss criteria for evaluating an exchange's denomination and fee 
structure.
 
 Motivation
 ==========
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ exchange and what it will mean for them.  Thus we want to 
define some metrics
 that allow a user to make more informed decisions.
 
 Similarly, the fee structure metrics might be used by exchange operators
-as a senity check.
+as a sanity check.
 
 An auditor might also enforce ranges on these metrics as a condition for
 auditing a denomination structure.
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ Is there a relationship between the smallest denomination and 
the size of fees?
 Idea: When when only doing spends on a coin that are a multiple of the 
smallest spending amount,
 we constrain the number of coins that are refreshed into.
 
-When evaluating the e2e cost of a denomiation, look at:
+When evaluating the e2e cost of a denomination, look at:
  * the cost of withdrawing the coin by itself and spending it fully, directly
  * the cost of withdrawing the coin, directly refreshing it into the next 
smallest
    fully fitting currency (or use greedy fit!) and add up the withdraw, 
refresh and re-withdraw fees.
@@ -118,3 +118,15 @@ Drawbacks
 
 Discussion / Q&A
 ================
+The Taler protocol offers the following fee types:
+
+1. 'Withdrawal': For each successful withdrawal from the checking account, per 
coin
+2. 'Deposit': For spending, per coin
+3. 'Refresh': Per coin for
+    a. Refresh transactions for receiving change
+    b. Refresh of coins at the end of their validity
+    c. Abort of transactions due to network failure
+    d. Refund
+4. 'Refund': For refunds or in case of contract cancellation by seller, per 
coin
+5. 'Wire fee': For aggregated amounts wired by the Exchange to the merchant's 
checking account, per wired transfer
+6. 'Closing': In case that a withdrawal process could not be accomplished (the 
users' wallet did not withdraw the value from the reserve), per wired transfer 
from the Exchange's escrow account to the account of origin

-- 
To stop receiving notification emails like this one, please contact
gnunet@gnunet.org.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]