Yuri Escalianti

That's a great point. One of the challenges I faced was to implement a multiple step interactive flow in SEP-24, in which the user could press the back button, change...

@JakeUrban I think there might be an issue with the web browser back/forward buttons when using the session to store the step. If the user presses the browser back button...

> You could redirect to request.build_absolute_uri() + urlencode({"currentStep": current_step - 1}). This creates an infinite redirect loop

This worked for me: ``` def interactive_url( self, request: Request, transaction: Transaction, asset: Asset, amount: Optional[Decimal], callback: Optional[str], *args: List, **kwargs: Dict, ) -> Optional[str]: if request.query_params.get("step"): raise NotImplementedError() step...

It should be easier to control the URL params, though.

After a few more tests, I see there's an issue when the form is invalid. Polaris [won't add my](https://github.com/stellar/django-polaris/blob/master/polaris/polaris/sep24/withdraw.py#L232) `step` parameter to the post URL, and what ends up happening...

> Its definitely tempting to change Polaris to be fully asynchronous but I think it increases the complexity and would break existing implementations. I agree, it's not worth changing Polaris...

Yes, I do get concerned when I imagine a scenario of 100 users trying to create a transaction (which can easily happen if the token is popular). The Anchor will...

`Asset.significant_decimals` (and possibly more fields) would also require some flexibility. Depending on the transfer type, the Anchor might wanna do rounding differently. Now I'm not sure if it's a good...

> That seems like a red flag. The asset should always be counted in the same units and no precision should be lost You're right. The scenario I imagined doesn't...