DAOstar standard vs EAS？
DAO*:
https://github.com/metagov/daostar/pull/95
https://github.com/metagov/daostar/blob/main/DAOIPs/daoip-3.md
In current DAOs, membership and contributions are commonly defined via ownership of on-chain assets, whether fungible tokens, NFTs, or (more recently) soulbound NFTs. But on-chain definitions miss many important use-cases and risk locking DAOs into very specific modes of membership and organization.
For example, a DAO may want to make membership contingent on some (off-chain) measure of participation such as git commits or Discourse posts, while definitions of contributions could vary across each of the (off- and on-chain) services that a DAO uses to track contributions.
Do they have conflicts?
| DAO star (more concreate) | EAS |
|---|---|
| API endpoint standards. |
Define URIs, data schema for attestations
It is for interoperability, by defining the format of URI/data format, then anyone else can consume it. | Define a framework of attestation | | Issuers Members Organizations Reputations | 2 Contracts: Schema contract, Make attestations contract | | | Self extended: Resolver contract |
Each attestation record has the following fields:
UID - this is a universal unique identification number for the attestation.Schema - the UID of the schema used to make the attestation.Attestor - the address that made the attestation.Recipient - an optional recipient of the attestation that was made.Expiration Time - an optional date that the attestation will expire if provided by the attestor.Revocation Time - the time at which the attestation was revoked (if any).