From 4b39ab03579f0896c26d6503ede00d634e8348a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ross Nicoll Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 11:30:44 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Clear up wording around how the FungibleAsset superclass is used Clear up wording around how the FungibleAsset superclass is used, and in particular that it contains contract code, but provides an interface that should be extended by subclass state objects. --- docs/source/transaction-data-types.rst | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/source/transaction-data-types.rst b/docs/source/transaction-data-types.rst index cbac98eaa6..752b09e607 100644 --- a/docs/source/transaction-data-types.rst +++ b/docs/source/transaction-data-types.rst @@ -38,9 +38,10 @@ which standardises how the ID is extracted. FungibleAssets and Cash ----------------------- -There is a common ``FungibleAsset`` superclass for contracts which model fungible assets, with ``Cash`` being the obvious -example. This is intended to be readily extensible to cover other assets, for example commodities could be modelled by -using a state object that included further details such as location of the commodity. +There is a common ``FungibleAsset`` superclass for contracts which model fungible assets, which also provides a standard +interface for its subclasses' state objects to implement. The clear use-case is ``Cash``, however ``FungibleAsset`` is +intended to be readily extensible to cover other assets, for example commodities could be modelled by using a subclass +whose state objects include further details (location of the commodity, origin, grade, etc.) as needed. Transaction Types -----------------