I’m exploring using native tokens and NFTs to provide supply chain transparency.
My plan is to mint native tokens to represent a component or material in the supply chain. Stored in the tokens metadata would be information on its provenance.
For example - a “cotton” token representing 1kg of raw cotton. The metadata would include information on the supplier, a link to an IPFS pin of the invoice and in time and with increased adoption a reference of the supplier tx on chain.
When the material is transformed into another material I would like to burn the first token and mint a new token whilst still being able to reference the metadata of the original token - Is this possible?
10 “raw cotton” tokens are burned and 500 “cotton yardage” tokens are minted. The “cotton yardage” tokens reference the minting and burning tx of the “raw cotton” tokens making the supplier information still visible.
Many thanks for any help, insight or input.
yes, it is possible as long the policy is still valid/unlocked (if the policy will be locked then you will not be able to burn/mint tokens under that policy)
Super - Thank you.
What’s the best way to reference the burned tokens - with the burn tx?
yes, I have also a guide for cntools users how to mint/burn tokens/nfts but I guess you don’t have cntools instaled… anyway you should get support (in case u will need it) for how to burn tokens
If you mint a token and in fact if you attach metadata to any transaction, not only mints and burns, the metadata is publicly available on the blockchain forever, even if it has been burnt again or the mint has been replaced by another one. It is attached to the transaction and can be retrieved from there by cardanoscan.io or APIs like https://www.koios.rest/.
Usually, the metadata is attached to the mint transaction, not the burn transaction. That’s where wallet apps or pool.pm search for the NFT metdata.
But since you want to do something totally different with these tokens than selling ugly apes on NFT marketplaces, you can also decide to specify your metadata differently.
For example, I do not know if you really need a separate asset ID, a real NFT, for every batch (which can become quite a lot) or if it could be enough to have asset IDs for “1 kg of raw cotton” and “1 m of cotton yardage” and then just specify that the information about the specific batch has to be contained in the metadata of mint transactions and information about the transformation in the metadata of the transaction burning raw cotton and minting cotton yardage.
Thanks for the insight and reply.
I wanted to check the technical sense of a catalyst proposal I’m submitting. You can take a look here Community