Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Define Base and Quote Token on markets #101

Open
fredo opened this issue Mar 20, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

Define Base and Quote Token on markets #101

fredo opened this issue Mar 20, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@fredo
Copy link
Contributor

fredo commented Mar 20, 2019

There is the confusion of what is defined as the base token and counter token.

General Definition

Base Token

The Base Token or respectively the Base Token Address is the token to be traded against the Quote Token.
In a Buy Order, the trader wants to buy the base token for a certain price quoted in the Quote Token.

Example:

BUY 100 RTT 0.01 WETH -> Buy 100 RTT for a price of 0.01 WETH per RTT resulting in a full price of 100 * 0.01 = 1 WETH

Quote Token

The Quote Token is the underlying token in which the price of any order is defined. The Quote Token is the one other tokens can be traded against. Price is always defined in Quote Token.

Example:

SELL 100 RTT 0.01 WETH -> Sell 100 RTT for a price of 0.01 WETH per RTT resulting in receiving the Quote Token amount of 1 WETH.

Future Idea

The idea in the future is to abstract that scheme in the backend to turning the market around making always the second token the quote token. For the user, the sell and buy for specified markets could stay but in the raidex client itself, it could be treated as two different markets which then match against each other.

@fredo
Copy link
Contributor Author

fredo commented Mar 20, 2019

For now the only quote market is WETH

@LefterisJP
Copy link

Sorry to bump in here but in general it's really good to have the pairs in the "BASE_QUOTE" form. It's easier to understand and is standard in many exchanges (not all though).

@fredo
Copy link
Contributor Author

fredo commented Mar 20, 2019

definitely, that's the way to go on from now. The future idea was just a thing to elaborate in the future if it was easier but no priority at all.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants