Been building an ASA minting dApp on Algorand and testing both FTs and NFTs with ARC‑3 metadata IPFS logos.
Setup:
•FTs: large total supply, decimals > 0, url → ARC‑3 JSON (name, unitName, decimals, description, image, image_mimetype).
•NFTs: total = 1, decimals = 0, similar ARC‑3 JSON with image.
Observed behavior across tools:
•Lora Pera Explorer: read ARC‑3 metadata, show logo description, and correctly mark fungible vs non‑fungible from on‑chain params.
•Pera Wallet: some fungible ARC‑3 assets with logos appear under the NFTs tab, even though they have 100M supply and 6 decimals.
•Defly: assets sometimes show as ? / no name or logo depending on metadata URL format (ipfs://... vs https://gateway/...) and how the ARC‑3 URL is encoded.
I’m trying to align tooling with wallet expectations for both FTs and NFTs, so creators get predictable results.
@PeraAlgoWallet @deflyapp is there a recommended pattern (ARC‑3 vs ARC‑19, URL format, metadata_hash, etc.) to ensure:
•FTs show as “tokens” and NFTs as “collectibles” in your UIs, and
•logos / names resolve reliably across wallets?
Not criticizing—just looking for guidance so dev tools can follow the same rules your apps are using. Any pointers or docs appreciated. 🙏
#Algorand #AlgorandDev #ASA #NFT