In brief
Transaction evidence moves through layers: wallet intent, node or mempool response, block inclusion, virtual processing, and accepted UTXO effects.
What this page explains#
Txid and full transaction hash must be explained separately because they answer different identity and commitment questions. This page sits in Transactions, UTXO, Fees, And Mempool. It gives the topic a plain-language handle first, then shows the working idea, the mechanism, the source trail, and any limits that still matter. This category follows a transaction from ownership model to structure, signing, validation, mempool admission, template selection, and accepted-state evidence. The main danger it prevents is collapsing all transaction states into one word.
The writing follows a simple Kaspa documentation pattern: answer the practical question first, then link outward for details. The closest public sources for this page are RK-HASH-TX, DOC-TOCCATA-TX-V1, RK-TX-SERDE. Local notes can help choose what to explain, but public-facing references resolve to upstream websites, repositories, papers, release pages, or docs.
How to think about it#
The practical model starts by naming the layer that owns the topic: wallet use, node operation, consensus, transaction validation, Toccata script behavior, tooling, or research. From there, the page shows which public source can support the explanation and where the explanation becomes incomplete.
For Transaction ID, Full Hash, Payload Digest, And Rest Digest, the model is built around these anchors: txid is used for transaction identity and outpoint references; full hash commits to a wider serialized transaction context than ordinary transaction identity; v1 hash logic separates payload digest from the rest of the transaction digest; signature script and mass exclusions matter to builders and readers; using hash and txid interchangeably creates review bugs. This model is useful, but it does not encode every constant, branch, error type, or edge case. Those details belong in the source path and the source notes.
How it works#
1. txid is used for transaction identity and outpoint references. A txid is the identifier most readers see first, but it is not automatically the same as every hash or digest a node uses internally. The page explains when a txid is suitable for references and when the review must switch to full-hash, payload digest, sighash, or serialization evidence.
2. full hash commits to a wider serialized transaction context than ordinary transaction identity. The full transaction hash is a wider commitment surface than the ID used for ordinary references. The page should state which fields are included, which digest path is being discussed, and why tooling that caches only a txid may miss data that matters for v1 payload or rest-digest review.
3. v1 hash logic separates payload digest from the rest of the transaction digest. Toccata-era transaction fields are application surfaces, so the guide must trace them through structs, serialization, hashing, signing, RPC, wallet tooling, mempool policy, and accepted evidence. The risk is not only invalid construction; it is a tool silently dropping or misunderstanding a field that the application relies on.
4. signature script and mass exclusions matter to builders and readers. Transaction pages mention covenants only as fields, scripts, signing commitments, or validation context. The transaction layer must preserve or check the relevant data, then route state-machine design to the covenant section and proof binding to the ZK section.
5. using hash and txid interchangeably creates review bugs. Using hash and txid as synonyms creates review bugs because each identifier may answer a different question. Builders, wallets, indexers, and explorers need to say whether they are comparing transaction identity, signed commitment, payload commitment, or full serialized content.
This mechanism section follows a transaction through construction, identity, signing, validation, mempool policy, block templates, and accepted evidence. The stage must be named before the claim is reused.
How to check it#
| Step | Check | Evidence gate |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Check txid is used for transaction identity and outpoint references. | Use RK-HASH-TX, DOC-TOCCATA-TX-V1, RK-TX-SERDE; name the stage: built, signed, validated, admitted, templated, mined, or accepted. |
| 2 | Check full hash commits to a wider serialized transaction context than ordinary transaction identity. | Use RK-HASH-TX, DOC-TOCCATA-TX-V1, RK-TX-SERDE; name the stage: built, signed, validated, admitted, templated, mined, or accepted. |
| 3 | Check v1 hash logic separates payload digest from the rest of the transaction digest. | Use RK-HASH-TX, DOC-TOCCATA-TX-V1, RK-TX-SERDE; name the stage: built, signed, validated, admitted, templated, mined, or accepted. |
| 4 | Check signature script and mass exclusions matter to builders and readers. | Use RK-HASH-TX, DOC-TOCCATA-TX-V1, RK-TX-SERDE; name the stage: built, signed, validated, admitted, templated, mined, or accepted. |
| 5 | Check using hash and txid interchangeably creates review bugs. | Use RK-HASH-TX, DOC-TOCCATA-TX-V1, RK-TX-SERDE; name the stage: built, signed, validated, admitted, templated, mined, or accepted. |
When using this page for a transaction claim, name the stage precisely: built, signed, validated, admitted to a mempool, included in a template, mined, accepted, or reflected in a UTXO change. Each stage has a different evidence surface and should not be collapsed into a single success word.
Related Pages#
- 03-inputs-outputs-and-outpoints
- transactions-utxo-mempool
- 05-sighash-and-signing-commitments