Why CTV+CSFS and not TXHASH

The current proposal under consideration by the community involves the combined implementation of CTV (CheckTemplateVerify) and CSFS (Commitment to Script-Free Signatures), which aims to standardize transaction commitments. However, there's an emerging conversation around TXHASH as a potentially superior alternative due to its broader functionality compared to the narrowly focused CTV+CSFS combination.

TXHASH distinguishes itself by enabling commitments not just to transaction templates but to specific inputs and outputs within those transactions. This capability offers a more granular level of control over transaction structure, addressing some of the limitations associated with CTV+CSFS. For instance, in certain vault setups under CTV+CSFS, users are forced into all-or-nothing fund movements due to the pre-templated and fixed nature of transaction amounts. By contrast, TXHASH's approach to allowing broader transaction commitments could mitigate such issues, providing flexibility and enhancing security for complex transaction structures.

There are several projects that stand to benefit from the adoption of TXHASH, including LN-Symmetry, Ark, PTLCs (Point Time-Locked Contracts), and DLCs (Discreet Log Contracts). Specifically, an application like Magnolia could use TXHASH to secure transaction guarantees that would otherwise require costly legal frameworks, such as Trust charters. This highlights the practical and immediate applications of TXHASH beyond theoretical enhancements to transaction commitment methodologies.

Despite the promising capabilities of TXHASH, there's a consideration to be made regarding market demand. Before fully committing to the development and deployment of TXHASH, it's crucial to assess whether there is ample demand for the basic wholesale transaction commitments offered by CTV+CSFS. The premise is that if there's significant interest and uptake of CTV+CSFS, it would indicate a robust market demand for more granular transaction commitment features, such as those provided by TXHASH. This step is vital to ensure that the progression towards adopting more sophisticated technologies like TXHASH is grounded in actual user needs and demands, thereby validating its necessity and potential for widespread adoption.