Namada namespace request or use cosmos? #161
Description
I’m trying to figure out how Namada should be represented here.
Namada is CometBFT/IBC-based, but it’s not Cosmos-SDK, and it also has different account/address behavior (transparent vs shielded).
- Should Namada get its own namespace (namada), or should it be covered under the existing cosmos namespace?
- If namada is OK, what should the CAIP-2 “reference” be (can we use the current chain id string namada.5f5de2dd1b88cba30586420)?
- For CAIP-10, should we document both transparent and shielded account identifiers, and how should they be expressed?