xmr-btc-swap/docs/research/user-experience/xmr-btc-user-interface-definition.md

# XMR<>BTC Atomic Swap - User Interface Prototypes

This document specifies assumptions concerning possible user interfaces on top of the [Monero-Bitcoin swap as described by Lucas on the COMIT-blog](https://comit.network/blog/2020/10/06/monero-bitcoin/).

We first specify assumptions and limitations imposed by the current setup and software needed for the swap, then outline possible solutions. 
This document will be used as a basis for defining and evaluating low-fidelity UI prototypes in the prototyping tool Figma.

## Assumptions

This section sums up assumptions around the current setup, protocol and existing software. 

### Technical Limitations

Swap-solutions that run completely in the browser (webpage) can be problematic because blockchain nodes, notably [bitcoind](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11833), do not specifying [CORS headers](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/CORS) in their response.
This means the browser will reject a response from a locally running Bitcoin node.

Theoretically this could be overcome by creating a node infrastructure behind a proper REST API, or with a locally running proxy. However, it is questionable if these are favourable solution, as they adds additional software on top of the blockchain nodes.  
We will focus on solutions that favour the use of locally running blockchain nodes.

### Current Setup

To be able to provide a reasonably trustless setup, where the user is in control of his private keys the user is currently advised to run his own Bitcoin and Monero node.

Given the current setup this results in the following software necessary to achieve a swap: 

* Bitcoin Blockchain Node
* Monero Blockchain Node
* Bitcoin Wallet
* Monero Wallet
* **Swap Execution Daemon**: Monitor the blockchain and move the swap forward to the next action.
* **Interface to connect the trading partners**: The two parties have to find each other and start the `Swap Execution Daemon` with the correct parameters. The interface can be realised in multiple different ways, from single-maker, P2P trading platform to P2P marketplace. 

For Bitcoin the current setup relies on a synced bitcoind node and bitcoind's wallet. 

For Monero the current setup relies on a synced monerod node and monero's wallet RPC. For funding Monero an existing wallet is unlocked and used for the swap. The current setup reliese on generating a *new* Monero wallet for `redeeming` or `refunding`.
This is not optimal for the user experience, as it means that a user cannot redeem or refund to an existing Monero wallet in the current setup. We decided **not** to model this restriction of the current setup in the prototypes, but to model the prototypes using an existin Monero wallet. 
We believe that it should be possible to use an existing wallet with investing more implementation time into the setup and protocol.

### Current Protocol

The POC protocol is asymmetric and comes with several constraints that affect the user experience: 

1. The party that funds Bitcoin has to fund first.
2. The party that funds Bitcoin is always in the role of Bob.
3. There is an information exchange (Bob sends Alice a key-part for redeeming) during the execution of the swap which requires (P2P) communication between the parties.

Even though that is not per se limiting we have to acknowledge that the protocol will behave different for the maker and taker for the respective direction of the swap.

The protocol comes with different incentives for the two roles Alice and Bob. 
We think that, for a maker it is favourable to be in the role of Alice, because in Alice is in the powerful position of holding the secret. Additionally Bob funds first in the POC.
However, to be able to allow a product that offers XRM->BTC and BTC->XMR swaps, we decided to let the maker and taker be in either role.
The UX of the swap might be different depending on the role a party takes, especially when depicting the swap steps.

### Additional Assumptions

The first version of a prototype will not include hardware wallet (e.g. Ledger Nano S) support.
In previous products we focused on swaps directly from and to cold storage, however, this does not concern a large enough user base to support it in the initial version. 
Furthermore, hardware wallets add certain restrictions (forced user-interaction to sign transactions) that might conflict with the current prototol design.
Hardware wallet support can be added at a later point if requested as feature by the community.

## Possible Solutions

This section outlines possible solutions based on the technical limitations and assumptions stated above.
This section does not focus on the UX of the swap and the use-case specifics, but on the flow of the application considering restrictions to the browser and applications running next to it.

We have explored the following options:

1. Extending existing (wallet) UIs (e.g. monero-wallet-gui) for swaps.
2. Webpage based swaps (completely running in browser).
3. Browser extension for swaps.
4. Desktop application for swaps.

Note that for desktop applications (4.) we explore the possibility of triggering the application through the browser.

### Extending existing (wallet) UIs

The nature of a swap requires management of both assets of the swap to be able to fund and redeem. 
This means, that a swap execution software has to interact with wallet software on both sides. 

Additionally, due to the complexity of the current swap protocol's setup and the fact that there is information exchange during the execution phase, it is highly questionable that communities on both sides would extend wallet functionality to allow swaps. 
For the time being the way forward seems to be a swap tool that plugs into existing wallet and blockchain node software on both sides, but handles additional requirements necessary for swap execution without modifying the existing software.

### Webpage

A complete webpage based solution is unfortunately not easily possible because of the restrictions of CORS headers and blockchain nodes not being able to supply CORS headers.
The swap protocol implementation could be done in javascript, or run as web-assembly, but since the current setup requires extensive communication with a (local) wallet 
We could enable communication between blockchain nodes and the browser through e.g. a proxy, but such a solution would not have an advantage over running a desktop application, because either way one has to run additional software next to the blockchain nodes to enable the swap.

### Browser Extension

In the previous section we discussed that webpage based solutions are currently not possible, due to blockchain nodes inability to specify CORS headers.
Browser extensions, however, are not as restrictive as webpages as can be seen in the [Google Chrome's documentsion](https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/xhr).
A browser extension would have the advantage of being able to offer a well-defined API, that allows multiple different web-sites to offer services within the extension.
This could range from discovery, negotiation to execution. 

Implementing a browser extension that handles the communication between maker and taker, and is able to communicate with locally running wallets and blockchain nodes is a valid solution.
We could also implement the decentralized orderbook on top of the browser extension, it is however, questionable if that would not be too much complexity packed into such kind of extension. 
We are still evaluating what is feasible for such an extension.
To start with a desktop application is simpler to prototype.

Mozilla's [web-ext tool](https://github.com/mozilla/web-ext) - besides [other tools](https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/develop/browser-extension-development-tools/) - can help enable cross-browser extensions.

### Desktop Application

A desktop application is a valid solution that is not subject to restrictions by the browser.
For previous MVPs we used Electron to implement cross-platform desktop applications. 

The problem of finding a trading partner can be outsourced to a webpage (e.g. single-maker only).
Custom URL schemes can help to provide a better user experience, as they allow us to open the swap desktop application with parameters passed to the application through the customer URL. 
It can, however, be be quite a pain to achieve the proper registration of custom URL schemas for different kinds of operating systems.

A stand-alone desktop applications is possible, but can be seen as a hurdle, because every user first has to download the binary to see any form of user interface.
For completx applications that involve a decentralized orderbook a desktop application might be advisable for the moment.

## Use-case specific prototypes

Given the assumptions, technical limitations and resulting possible solutions described above this section specifies details for the prototypes described in the [initial project description](https://github.com/coblox/spikes/blob/master/0003-xmr-btc-product.md).
In the initial project description we define two products to be be mocked as prototypes, (A) single market maker and (B) peer-to-peer decentralized trading platform. 

Note, that the use-cases of a single market maker product and a peer-to-peer decentralized trading platform are agnostic to the user interface.
Both products can be realised as CLI or UI taken into account the assumption listed above.

The "product specific prototypes" focus on the setup and interaction of different software. 
When it comes to prototyping specific user interface details, like for example the swap execution steps, we may opt for creating separate detail-mocks focussing on these details.

### A. Single Market Maker product

The point of this product is to keep `finding a trading partner` (discovery) and `agreeing on a trade` (negotiation) simple by only having a single maker. 
A single-maker runs a webpage that gives a price. A taker can "take it of leave it".

We plan to create two prototypes:

1. **Webpage + CLI:** The webpage prints a command that instructs the taker how to start the swap execution daemon.
2. **Webpage + UI:** The webpage uses a custom URL schema to trigger a desktop application passing the trading parameters to the application.

Additionally we might showcase a prototype that uses a webpage and browser-extension given that we can fit it into the project scope.

### B. Peer-to-peer decentralised trading platform

This product differs from product (A) by treating the discovery in a decentralized manner as well as allowing multiple makers.

The prototype will be modelled in a way, that keeps the negotiation (i.e. orderbook) simple.
The discovery shall be depicted as peer-to-peer.
It is planned to show specific orders of makers to takers, rather than prototyping a trading platform that includes order-matching.
The prototype will be modelled as desktop application that includes and controls the swap execution daemon.