Ranging from this textual content at https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script:
“The script for a typical Bitcoin switch to vacation spot Bitcoin tackle D merely encumbers future spending of the bitcoins with two issues: the spender should present 1. a public key that, when hashed, yields vacation spot tackle D embedded within the script …”
after which trying on the HTLC script:
OP_IF
[HASHOP] <digest> OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_DUP OP_HASH160 <vendor pubkey hash>
OP_ELSE
<num> [TIMEOUTOP] OP_DROP OP_DUP OP_HASH160 <purchaser pubkey hash>
OP_ENDIF
OP_EQUALVERIFY
OP_CHECKSIG
My unique thought was that the HTLC might solely be redeemed to the tackle behind <vendor pubkey hash> or <purchaser pubkey hash>: they’re the one information referring to addresses embedded within the script so have to be the “vacation spot tackle” referred to above. I perceive this to be improper.
Am I now appropriate in pondering:
- That the 2 pubkey hashes merely set up the proper of the redeemer to take the respective department;
- There’s actually no “vacation spot tackle D embedded within the script” for an HTLC;
- That the vendor or purchaser could redeem to any tackle they like;
- And that tackle can stay undecided by the funding and lifetime of the HTLC till the moments earlier than redemption?