ERC-137 vs ERC-2390

Ethereum Domain Name Service - Specification compared with Geo-ENS.

Overlapping, neither contains the other

1 shared · 15 vs 3 functions · 33% of the smaller surface

ERC-2390 lists ERC-137 in its requires field but declares no inheritance in its interface, so any surface it inherits is not counted here.

🤝 Shared (1)

0x01ffc9a7 supportsInterface(bytes4)

`0x3b3b57de`	`addr(bytes32)`
`0x19a17468`	`ENS(address)`
`0x9d063ed8`	`FIFSRegistrar(address,bytes32)`
`0x02571be3`	`owner(bytes32)`
`0xebb045fa`	`PublicResolver(address)`
`0xd22057a9`	`register(bytes32,address)`
`0x659755f9`	`Resolver()`
`0x0178b8bf`	`resolver(bytes32)`
`0xd5fa2b00`	`setAddr(bytes32,address)`
`0x5b0fc9c3`	`setOwner(bytes32,address)`
`0x1896f70a`	`setResolver(bytes32,address)`
`0x06ab5923`	`setSubnodeOwner(bytes32,bytes32,address)`
`0x14ab9038`	`setTTL(bytes32,uint64)`
`0x16a25cbd`	`ttl(bytes32)`

`0x7d867acc`	`geoAddr(bytes32,bytes8,uint8)`
`0xf23abf02`	`setGeoAddr(bytes32,bytes8,address)`

Both surfaces parsed from the canonical specifications: ERC-137 · ERC-2390