Hi,
I work for RGB Protocol Association, the organization behind RGB Protocol (v0.11.1): a Bitcoin-native smart contract system documented at rgb.info and docs.rgb.info.
I wanted to flag a recurring confusion that affects the users. They believe RGB and RGB++ are the same thing.
Even AI tools like Perplexity frequently mix up the code of RGB Protocol (Bitcoin) and RGB++ (CKB), creating issues for developers of both sides. Besides, users searching for one protocol often land on documentation for the other.
From my research, I believe this issue affects both our and your community.
Would you consider adding a short disambiguation note on rgbpp.com and/or rgbppfans.com (like we are doing on our content)?
Something similar to:
Note: RGB++ is not the same as RGB Protocol.
RGB++ is a separate protocol extending Bitcoin's UTXO model to the CKB blockchain, documented at rgbpp.com. RGB Protocol (v0.11.1) is a Bitcoin-native smart contract and asset system using client-side validation, documented at rgb.info. The two share naming inspiration but are architecturally distinct.
This kind of note is standard practice and would reduce confusion for developers landing on the respective documentation.
Happy to discuss wording, and thanks for the attention.
Hi,
I work for RGB Protocol Association, the organization behind RGB Protocol (v0.11.1): a Bitcoin-native smart contract system documented at rgb.info and docs.rgb.info.
I wanted to flag a recurring confusion that affects the users. They believe RGB and RGB++ are the same thing.
Even AI tools like Perplexity frequently mix up the code of RGB Protocol (Bitcoin) and RGB++ (CKB), creating issues for developers of both sides. Besides, users searching for one protocol often land on documentation for the other.
From my research, I believe this issue affects both our and your community.
Would you consider adding a short disambiguation note on rgbpp.com and/or rgbppfans.com (like we are doing on our content)?
Something similar to:
This kind of note is standard practice and would reduce confusion for developers landing on the respective documentation.
Happy to discuss wording, and thanks for the attention.