why tick dmt-chaos deploy inscription is 04c6a15d1f1388457670dff5db560a34755fd41b1bd8b4cdbf1e033cb3dc6309i0?

[zhiying8710]

why dmt-chaos deploy inscription is not a1c41439feb7d9748bbd1e8ae3099ec6d1ddffc7c7be3a53d86acb6e87f8277ci0, base on rules and first-is-first, should be this inscription is the dmt-chaos's deploy inscription??? i'm really confused, the tap-protocol-specs doc missing some rule explanations.

[maxgmer]

I agree, first should be first. Or last, but on the same sat as first.
Otherwise it opens up a way to "attack" indexers. Anyone can mess up the returned data from tap-reader by inscribing the same ticker again.

Would like to see clarification as well.

[maxgmer]

Investigated your case, TAP protocol has worked correctly.
It indexed the first VALID deployment inscription with the ticker.

a1c41439feb7d9748bbd1e8ae3099ec6d1ddffc7c7be3a53d86acb6e87f8277ci0 was not indexed, because it is invalid. Specifically, "dt" field was not specified. Yes, in the documentation it says that "dt" is "optional", but if you read carefully, you'll see that it's optional only in cases where the chosen element doesn't have an explicit pattern.
https://digital-matter-theory.gitbook.io/digital-matter-theory/introduction/non-arbitrary-tokens-nats/nat-deployment-format

In this case, there is an explicit pattern in the element and no "dt".