Conform to NFT standard

[codynhat]

A land parcel should be represented as an NFT. Most likely ERC721.

Transfers must be handled appropriately with the Harberger tax structure.

How do we want land to be exchanged on open marketplaces like OpenSea?

[gravenp]

Reasons to conform to an NFT standard:

• Ability for owner to transfer a land parcel without paying themselves for it
• Gifting of NFT
• Have parcels show in standard wallets
• Discoverability on other open marketplaces
• Ability to fractionalize the NFT
• Ownership of Ceramic documents by NFT
• General infrastructure built around standards

Reason not to conform to an NFT standard:

• Arbitrage/avoid scams on different markets (pump price on different market while paying lower taxes)
• In some way it breaks the Harberger tax mechanisms or is incompatible
• Potential user experience degradation on other markets (OpenSea won't display a parcel like the Cadastre can)

[gravenp]

This will be a good one to discuss with the Wildcards team potentially. They used ERC721 it looks like, but have an open issue to explore ERC1155 (potentially making batch foreclosures easier).

[codynhat]

Leaning towards not allowing NFT transfers, but including all other functionality.

[codynhat]

Wildcards disables transfers by hardcoding the "steward" to be the only one authorized to transfer

https://github.com/wildcards-world/contracts/blob/master/contracts/ERC721Patronage_v1.sol#L35

Under our system, transfers should only be allowed when a forced sale is happening.

[codynhat]

Should we still allow owners to be approved for transfer? They would not be allowed to approve others (like OpenSea), but this would allow them to transfer land between their own wallets.