When implementing the ERC721 contract standard, how strictly does one have to stick to the naming conventions of the method signatures - as spelled out by the standard?
Take for example the
ownerOf function. The standard spells it out as follows:
function ownerOf(uint256 _tokenId) external view returns (address);
But what happens if I change the argument names when I implement this function in my contract? For example:
function ownerOf(uint256 _creatureID) external view returns (addressOfOwner);
So instead of
_tokenId I have
_creatureID and instead of
address I have
Does that negate the conformity? Will other platforms not be able to recognize and work with my contract because I made these changes? Or is it only the function's actual name -
ownerOf - that matters?