The definition of onerous fork is that it is a leisure of the consensus guidelines; in different phrases, some blocks are actually legitimate that beforehand would not be legitimate. As a result of a block with some transactions changed with a ZKP would not beforehand be legitimate, that is by definition a tough fork.
Whether or not this could really find yourself splitting the community will depend on what the trusted committee would do:
The Good
The allegedly leaked messages counsel that such knowledge deletion would solely apply to “buried” blocks, i.e. not the latest block. On this case the unique transaction knowledge would already be extensively disseminated; so long as there are some nodes operating the pre-fork model, the information ought to stay accessible for newly spun up pre-fork nodes to sync.
The Dangerous
Nonetheless, there seems to be nothing stopping the trusted committee from colluding and deleting knowledge this fashion from a transaction that was by no means made public, after which getting a miner to incorporate it in a block. On this case the community would break up, as pre-fork nodes would by no means obtain the unique transaction knowledge wanted to confirm and settle for the block.
The Ugly
The present state-of-the-art ZKP programs for verifying the Bitcoin blockchain (e.g. Raito) are (so far as I do know) presently restricted to verifying the longest header chain and transaction inclusion; they can not but confirm script execution. If this proposed fork is to be deployed anytime quickly, it appears doubtless that the ZKP would not really absolutely validate the spending situations of the transaction inputs, opening up the opportunity of the committee colluding and stealing funds.
