# Multi-Token Standard Discussion **URL:** \ **Category:** Standards\ **Created:** [June 15, 2021, 9:59pm UTC](https://gov.near.org/t/multi-token-standard-discussion/2917 "2021-06-15T21:59:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 2
**Author:** ![jlwaugh](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/gov.near.org/jlwaugh/32/42_2.png) [@jlwaugh](https://gov.near.org/u/jlwaugh)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2021, 12:32am UTC](https://gov.near.org/t/multi-token-standard-discussion/2917/2 "2021-06-18T00:32:45Z")
Love it! Hoping to build on the discussion framework you created, I’ll share a few ideas, given my knowledge of existing patterns and solutions. To choose/generate a solution that satisifies the Near ecosystem needs, we understand our vision of a world where all people have control of their data, money, and power of governance. How can multi-tokens help us achieve that goal? Why are they necessary? [Fungibility](https://epub.wu.ac.at/8137) is just one spectrum of possible token designs, and I believe combining the interfaces would result in opportunities for adoption by wallets and exchanges. Not only can these more complex structures provide greater accountability for everyone using NEAR apps. I agree that ability to make batch requests with multiple asset classes is a killer feature, and I’m so excited to explore all kinds of use cases for multi-tokens! For example, reputation is a complex idea requiring many levels to define properly, and nobody has really succeeded in developing a legitimate credit system for the open web. My feeling is it has to be validated on the network of participants representing themselves with accounts. Responding to your questions: 1. I think we should follow the same pattern as the NFT and FT standards, although I wonder if there is a need for matching ERC-1155. Considering ERC-20 tokens can be converted into NEP-141 tokens across the bridge, I guess ERC-1155 tokens could also interoperate. 2. GNR8 is the best reference implementation for a kind of multi-token on NEAR, as far as I know. I’m curious to explore how account storage relates to dealing with unique identifiers of token IDs across classes / namespaces. Everyone has their own settings 😄 One thing I’d potentially bring up is the mysterious [ERC-888](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/888) standard… `mapping (address => mapping (string => uint)) balances;` This weird loop might be useful in contextualizing systems for imbued value. --- _[View the full topic](https://gov.near.org/t/multi-token-standard-discussion/2917)._