Incorrect Placement of TypedMessage in ERC-2612

[zakrad]

Pull Request

No response

What happened?

Issue Description:
Currently, in the provided EIP-2612 typed message structure, the "message," "primaryType," and "domain" fields are incorrectly placed within the "types" scope. According to the EIP-712 specification, these fields should be outside of the "types" scope.

Expected Behavior:
The "message," "primaryType," and "domain" fields should be defined at the top-level scope of the typed message structure, rather than within the "types" scope.

Expected Structure:

 {
  "types": {
    "EIP712Domain": [
      {
        "name": "name",
        "type": "string"
      },
      {
        "name": "version",
        "type": "string"
      },
      {
        "name": "chainId",
        "type": "uint256"
      },
      {
        "name": "verifyingContract",
        "type": "address"
      }
    ],
    "Permit": [
      {
        "name": "owner",
        "type": "address"
      },
      {
        "name": "spender",
        "type": "address"
      },
      {
        "name": "value",
        "type": "uint256"
      },
      {
        "name": "nonce",
        "type": "uint256"
      },
      {
        "name": "deadline",
        "type": "uint256"
      }
    ]
  },
  "primaryType": "Permit",
  "domain": {
    "name": "erc20name",
    "version": "version",
    "chainId": "chainid",
    "verifyingContract": "tokenAddress"
  },
  "message": {
    "owner": "owner",
    "spender": "spender",
    "value": "value",
    "nonce": "nonce",
    "deadline": "deadline"
  }
}

Relevant log output

No response

[SamWilsn]

Is this an issue of a misplaced }? If so, I think that's a reasonable errata to fix in a Final EIP. Could you open a pull request to make the change?

[zakrad]

Ok, I will do it.