Basic NFT - Non Fungible Token

Greetings Everyone,

I would like to introduce you to the Basic Non-Fungible Token template.
It does all basic functions:

  • Mint
  • Burn
  • Approve
  • Transfer

The safe transfer is not added because of these templates which I am submitting like more of a working exercise for new users however it is simple to implement this function and if you can understand the template then you can easily create a new mapping.

Please let me know if there are improvements that require in this.
In two days I will add this template to the Aeternity Studio templates git pull request Adding new templates to fire editor by VitalJeevanjot · Pull Request #32 · aeternity/fire-editor · GitHub .


What’s the difference between this and AEX9

Hello Baixin,

AEX9 refers to the standard of Fungible Tokens, Where each token has the same value anywhere.
On the other hand, this makes each token unique with its own free value.

For example, AEX9 is a single type of currency (Like $1 USD for every token. 100 tokens = $100 USD)
All tokens can be recognized as their unique string (Like Dai, BNB, Baixin, etc., and all can be minted by you or transferred at huge amounts)

This: $1 USD for one token you hold and another one you hold can be a million dollars worth (Depends on the use case of course) on the same contract.
Each token can be recognized in its own unique string (Like one can have the name Baixin the other one can have Chain as a name and both can belong to you or one to someone else which you can choose to transfer, etc.)

Jeevanjot Singh.


Because of no further discussion, I have added the contracts in the pull request

1 Like

Thanks for building and sharing! Look forward to trying this out.


thank you @Boone

Why does it talk about Erc721?

Does Aeternity support Ethereum standards?

It doesn’t, It is a bit modified copy of ERC721. Well ofcourse the type of structure you can make on Solidity can be done in Sophia as well.

1 Like

So I guess there is no standard for NFT on Aeternity?

It’s just a little confusing without any further context in the example. If Aeternity goes a different direction it wouldn’t work right?

If you are going to build ERC721, which I actually think is great, it feels like it should be on the AEVM. Like how can we run say Truffle’s prebuilt token libraries while still using Sophia to expand it’s functionality.

By AEVM you mean Fate?

yes, it is built-in Sophia and submitted a month ago. If it is ok to put it as standard then I feel the team would make such decisions better based on the future scope of apps.


No Fate is the other VM.

The AEVM is how you can run Ethereum Solidity code on Aeternity.

Is it active, How can I use it (or deploy to it) where can I find its contract interface.
Thanks for sharing.

AEVM shouldn’t be used anymore @hadees.chain, in fact AEVM is being deprecate in next Iris hardfork GH 3151 AEVM deprecation and cleanup by hanssv · Pull Request #3519 · aeternity/aeternity · GitHub

What we should finish is our NFT standard taking the best advantage of Sophia . @VitalJeevanjot started this and with the help of @bruteforce.chain and @philipp.chain I think we could have a finalized AEX-12 for NFT ? GitHub - aeternity/AEXs: Aeternity expansions repository — application layer standards


Does that include a project for compiling Solidly to Fate? Or are they just going to abandon anyone using Solidty code?

Also won’t we be running another EVM for Hyperchains?

1 Like

I don’t think so, we are convinced that we have a much better engine to run smart contracts with FATE what doesn’t mean that we won’t encourage people to migrate from solidity tough.

Keep in touch with our next hackathon to be unveiled in a few days…

1 Like

I think it’s a good idea to have an NFT standard in æternity similar to ERC721 to make it easier for all those existing NFT projects that have already launched on ETH to take advantage of æternity network including state channels and oracles on layer 1.

1 Like

Yeah I’m not really questioning that FATE is better. I’m obviously pro AE otherwise I wouldn’t be here.

As a developer you are just asking me to take a big leap of faith without the tooling already created. Like if we can’t use openzeppelin then there has to be an aeternity equivalent. Ethereum is just in the lead in a lot of that stuff.

I think compiling Solidty to FATE would be awesome and solve most of the problems, but I know the code will probably end up suboptimal, although that might be a good thing.


Not gonna lie, If compiling solidity to Fate or running 100% solidity on fate is possible then it should give AE a much bigger boost. Many protocols can be copied/migrated to AE easily because of low fees and instant transfers. But if there is a downside to this then it’s also good to know by developers that why it is deprecated and doesn’t allow future support.


I hear you guys and I think you should take a look on this thread and also bring your questions about this there: [Spoiler Warning] User satisfaction & Dev Experience Improvement - #7 by Baixin.chain

1 Like