It could have been doable however it could be dearer to take action. From Michael Folkson Was the lifting of the Taproot transaction dimension restrict “unintentional”? Why would ordinals need to fill a block with OP_RETURNs?
Ordinals do not use OP_RETURN, however push a script within the witness straight.
OP_FALSE OP_IFOP_ENDIF
Bitcoin is not right here used as an anchor layer, however as a storage layer as arbitrary knowledge conserved within the witness of a tx.
From Pinhead (in the identical thread)
Since there isn’t any scriptCode straight included within the signature hash (solely not directly by a precomputable tapleaf hash), the CPU time spent on a signature examine is not proportional to the dimensions of the script being executed. The utmost script dimension of 10000 bytes doesn’t apply. Their dimension is barely implicitly bounded by the block weight restrict.
Not utilizing OP_RETURN permits the script dimension to be implicitly restricted by the block weight restrict. In any other case you would want to pay for every OP_RETURN on top of the dimensions of the information itself and could be restricted by OP_RETURN’s most script dimension.
