Re: FPWD-ready Web Payments HTTP API and HTTP Messages specs

Manu, Shane,

The doc LGTM but I think it would make a lot of difference if that first
diagram was changed to no represent a tokenised card payment. That has
caused a LOT of confusion and the issue logged against it has been open for
some time.

Could the following minor changes be made to make this clearer:

   1. Add another Payment Network participant to the left of the Payment App
   2. Add an optional request/response to that participant between steps 6
   and 7 (same labels as 9 and 10).
   3. Make current steps 9 and 10 optional (if it's possible you could
   indicate that the payment instruction is sent either by the app or the
   payee)
   4. Drop the word tokenized
   5. Change the diagram label to be generic

Finally, I think that the numbering on the diagram and then the subsequent
section is confusing because they don't line up. Could we drop the
numbering in the diagram for now?

I submitted a PR to fix this a while back that was never merged.

Adrian

On 9 September 2016 at 14:37, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:

> Thank you both, I’ve sent the transition request.
>
> Ian
>
> > On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:13 PM, Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io> wrote:
> >
> > I will do a quick pass in the AM.  Thanks for jumping on this tonight,
> Manu!
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
> wrote:
> > FPWD-ready specs for Web Payments HTTP API and Web Payments HTTP
> > Messages are available here:
> >
> > Web Payments HTTP Messages 1.0
> > https://w3c.github.io/webpayments-http-messages/WD/2016-09-15/
> >
> > Web Payments HTTP API 1.0
> > https://w3c.github.io/webpayments-http-api/WD/2016-09-15/
> >
> > Relevant changes:
> > * Renamed Web Payments Core Messages to Web Payments HTTP Messages
> > * Updated prose for Web Payments HTTP Messages to reflect new title
> > * Set publication date to 2015-09-15 (the last day before the
> >   publishing moratorium takes effect). Pubteam always has the option to
> >   publish before that date.
> > * Updated broken links
> >
> > Checks performed:
> > * Both docs pass pubrules
> > * Both docs have been link checked
> >
> > Shane, did I miss anything?
> >
> > If not, Chairs and Staff, the specs are good to go for FPWD.
> >
> > -- manu
> >
> > --
> > Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
> > Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> > blog: Advancing the Web Payments HTTP API and Core Messages
> > https://manu.sporny.org/2016/yes-to-http-api/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Shane McCarron
> > Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
>
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>
>
>
>