Hi team — first off, congrats on shipping the Mini Apps Framework in Pay v2.10.0. The web-view + dual-provider pattern is clean.
I'm exploring building an HTLC-based application on Nimiq and would love to deploy it as a Nimiq Pay mini app. Looking at the published @nimiq/mini-app-sdk v0.0.2, the Nimiq provider currently exposes:
listAccounts
sign
sendBasicTransaction
sendBasicTransactionWithData
- staking methods (delegate / re-delegate / undelegate / etc.)
…and there's a // TODO: Add other transaction creation types comment in the source where HTLC helpers would naturally go.
I also saw Micha's Nov 7 2025 forum reply mentioning "NIM core parity (send/receive/stake/HTLC in Pay)" under the near term roadmap. That's exactly the gap I'd love to plan around.
A few questions, in order of usefulness to me:
- Is there a target window for when HTLC create / redeem / refund methods will land in
@nimiq/mini-app-sdk? Even a rough quarter would help me decide whether to wait or to ship a non-mini-app version first and port later.
- Is there a draft API shape you're considering? (e.g.
provider.createHTLC({ recipient, hash_root, hash_count, hash_algorithm, timeout_ms, total_amount }) or similar.) Knowing the shape early would let me design the surrounding flow against it.
- Are EVM-side HTLCs already viable today through the standard EIP-1193 provider exposed alongside the Nimiq provider? My read is yes —
eth_sendTransaction should accept any contract call, including HTLC contract deploys/redeems on Polygon, Arbitrum, etc. — but confirming that's an intended use case would be helpful.
- Would a community PR be useful to scaffold the HTLC method signatures (without changing core wallet behavior)? Happy to put together a draft PR against
nimiq/trust-web3-provider if it'd accelerate the roadmap or give the team something concrete to react to.
For context on the use case (high-level only): I'm prototyping an HTLC-based atomic-swap / settlement application that builds directly on Nimiq's native HTLC primitive. Multi-currency settlement (NIM + EVM-side stables) is one of the angles I'm exploring. Whether I can drive the NIM HTLC lifecycle from inside a mini app is the load-bearing decision for going mini-app-first vs. standalone-PWA-first.
Thanks for the work on Pay — happy to provide more context on the use case if it's helpful for prioritization.
Hi team — first off, congrats on shipping the Mini Apps Framework in Pay v2.10.0. The web-view + dual-provider pattern is clean.
I'm exploring building an HTLC-based application on Nimiq and would love to deploy it as a Nimiq Pay mini app. Looking at the published
@nimiq/mini-app-sdkv0.0.2, the Nimiq provider currently exposes:listAccountssignsendBasicTransactionsendBasicTransactionWithData…and there's a
// TODO: Add other transaction creation typescomment in the source where HTLC helpers would naturally go.I also saw Micha's Nov 7 2025 forum reply mentioning "NIM core parity (send/receive/stake/HTLC in Pay)" under the near term roadmap. That's exactly the gap I'd love to plan around.
A few questions, in order of usefulness to me:
@nimiq/mini-app-sdk? Even a rough quarter would help me decide whether to wait or to ship a non-mini-app version first and port later.provider.createHTLC({ recipient, hash_root, hash_count, hash_algorithm, timeout_ms, total_amount })or similar.) Knowing the shape early would let me design the surrounding flow against it.eth_sendTransactionshould accept any contract call, including HTLC contract deploys/redeems on Polygon, Arbitrum, etc. — but confirming that's an intended use case would be helpful.nimiq/trust-web3-providerif it'd accelerate the roadmap or give the team something concrete to react to.For context on the use case (high-level only): I'm prototyping an HTLC-based atomic-swap / settlement application that builds directly on Nimiq's native HTLC primitive. Multi-currency settlement (NIM + EVM-side stables) is one of the angles I'm exploring. Whether I can drive the NIM HTLC lifecycle from inside a mini app is the load-bearing decision for going mini-app-first vs. standalone-PWA-first.
Thanks for the work on Pay — happy to provide more context on the use case if it's helpful for prioritization.