You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In src/resources/royalty.ts, there are many functions that have a parameter named royaltyVaultIpId. These should actually be renamed to ipId. The expected parameter is not the royalty vault id, rather it is the ip id of the asset associated with the royalty vault.
For example, here is snapshotAndClaimByTokenBatch
However in the actual contract, it is called ipId
I think it is confusing, and making it ipId would be more clear for developers
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In src/resources/royalty.ts, there are many functions that have a parameter named
royaltyVaultIpId
. These should actually be renamed toipId
. The expected parameter is not the royalty vault id, rather it is the ip id of the asset associated with the royalty vault.For example, here is
![Screenshot 2025-01-01 at 9 45 27 PM](https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/15198786/399603254-a060039d-a0f0-4041-80f7-037d20113799.png?jwt=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.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.IB2k2wvjrINnioXhDA8PKqkKEIDVS27Ye0UFv4CIyps)
snapshotAndClaimByTokenBatch
However in the actual contract, it is called
![image](https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/15198786/399603276-775196c1-64e3-4132-9a14-3251b1d98187.png?jwt=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.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.-_sNW3bN3cah4st1-fpOMN60DPzRGvDw4LA02lf2_KE)
ipId
I think it is confusing, and making it ipId would be more clear for developers
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: