add a wildcard case for CAIP 25

[romeo4934]

No description provided.

[ligi]

just wondering if a wildcard like this could make sense "eip155:*"
as far as I understand with this change this would not be possible

[romeo4934]

Yes Pedro mention this usecase in the issue. However, I was just thinking that it could be a little bit confusing because it means the character "*" could break regex rules for CAIP:2

[romeo4934]

I can add it if needed?

[ligi]

I think the * must not match the CAIP:2 rules. It is not part of CAIP-2 in this case. Just think "accepting all eth chains" could be a nice use case. But no strong opinion on this. Waiting for @pedrouid 's input.

[pedrouid]

I'm still all debating this personally because on one hand the wildcard will introduce complexity to the CAIP-2 specification but on the other I don't see many better alternatives.

I would love to actually schedule a call to work on something that I think would be extremely beneficial for many blockchain projects. A working group for building a specification for a CAIP provider that could include both CAIP-24, CAIP-25 and other potential proposals to develop something analogous to EIP-1193 spec

[ligi]

I am not sure the wildcard should be part of CAIP-2. Maybe part of this CAIP or an CAIP that extends CAIP-2 with wildcard options (then blochain IDs instead of blockchain ID)

LMK when the call will be - ideally for me wednesday would work

[romeo4934]

I am happy to do a call as well! For starname, we need to be able to query wallets and know which chains they support so we can ask and get all their accounts. So we can add a wildcard or we could add another type of query to get the list of chains a wallet support.

[romeo4934]

Should we abandon this idea and create another method to get the list of chainIds that a wallet provider support? @pedrouid @ligi

[pedrouid]

Actually I think that's a better idea which is already in line with #24