From bd178f63be477d0e631e8853cc3370bd461d1714 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: oliveredget <188809800+oliveredget@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 22:40:43 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Update EIP-7788: fix typo

---
 EIPS/eip-7788.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/EIPS/eip-7788.md b/EIPS/eip-7788.md
index 0b898d48566d04..3d0ccde985891d 100644
--- a/EIPS/eip-7788.md
+++ b/EIPS/eip-7788.md
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ Ethereum currently uses a target of 50% capacity for blob count, with [EIP-1559]
 
 With static targeting the target may be higher than the actual demand, causing the protocol to undercharge for blobspace. This decreases the amount of fees burned, negatively affecting the price of ETH and total network security.
 
-As an example, consider what would happen if there was a large increase in max blob count due to DAS implementation but the target remained at 50%. It is unlikely that demand would immediately jump to anywhere near the target, and so for months or years the protocol would effectively charge nothing for L2 transactions. With a dynamic target, the target blob count would drop until the cost of blobspace for an L2 transaction approximated some affordable constant value. In this way, some fees are still burned by the protocol, but new L2s are not discouraged from using Ethereum blobspace, knowing that the target will increase in response to an increase in demand and blob fees will remain reasonably consisent.
+As an example, consider what would happen if there was a large increase in max blob count due to DAS implementation but the target remained at 50%. It is unlikely that demand would immediately jump to anywhere near the target, and so for months or years the protocol would effectively charge nothing for L2 transactions. With a dynamic target, the target blob count would drop until the cost of blobspace for an L2 transaction approximated some affordable constant value. In this way, some fees are still burned by the protocol, but new L2s are not discouraged from using Ethereum blobspace, knowing that the target will increase in response to an increase in demand and blob fees will remain reasonably consistent.
 
 While the max blob count and max target are hard constraints based on resource utilisation limits, setting the target itself is far more subjective. A dynamic target can optimise for constant and affordable L2 transaction costs without requiring regular intervention by core developers to make tweaks based on changes in demand.