ERC-721 vs ERC-4393

Non-Fungible Token Standard compared with Micropayments for NFTs and Multi Tokens.

Overlapping, neither contains the other

1 shared · 10 vs 9 functions · 11% of the smaller surface

ERC-4393 lists ERC-721 in its requires field but declares no inheritance in its interface, so any surface it inherits is not counted here.

🤝 Shared (1)

0x70a08231 balanceOf(address)

`0x095ea7b3`	`approve(address,uint256)`
`0x081812fc`	`getApproved(uint256)`
`0xe985e9c5`	`isApprovedForAll(address,address)`
`0x6352211e`	`ownerOf(uint256)`
`0xb88d4fde`	`safeTransferFrom(address,address,uint256,bytes)`
`0x42842e0e`	`safeTransferFrom(address,address,uint256)`
`0xa22cb465`	`setApprovalForAll(address,bool)`
`0x01ffc9a7`	`supportsInterface(bytes4)`
`0x23b872dd`	`transferFrom(address,address,uint256)`

`0x12c81d4f`	`balanceDepositOf(address)`
`0x47e7ef24`	`deposit(address,uint256)`
`0x12425d4e`	`isApprovalForNFT(address,address,uint256)`
`0x65fd0794`	`rewardPendingOf(address)`
`0xbe3f51bb`	`setApprovalForNFT(address[],address,uint256,bool)`
`0xb7577fbe`	`tip(address,uint256,uint256)`
`0xed184baf`	`tipBatch(address[],address[],uint256[],uint256[])`
`0x523a3f08`	`withdrawReward(uint256)`

Both surfaces parsed from the canonical specifications: ERC-721 · ERC-4393