Re: Executive summary / Group goals (was: Re: [use cases] Meeting minutes for 2015-02-24 telecon)

Hi Manu and all,

Just a note that I started to edit that page today:
 https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/ExecSummary

I will have a look at your comments tomorrow, Manu, but you may also want to have a look at the updates.

Ian


> On Feb 25, 2015, at 8:18 PM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> 
> On 02/25/2015 12:42 AM, chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:
>> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/ExecSummary
> 
> Thoughts below:
> 
>> A fast and significant adoption of the technology (>100M+ in the first two years).
> 
> +1
> 
>> Level playing field (aka fair competition) for merchants, payment providers, customers, software vendors, and payment networks.
> 
> +1
> 
>> A great reduction in "stolen card" transaction fraud.
> 
> +0.9 - why the quotes? Or rather, if we're quoting it, it may mean that
> we mean something nuanced, which will most likely be lost on the reader.
> I'm bike-shedding here, so feel free to ignore unless this is an issue
> for someone else.
> 
>> A great reduction in the amount of custom software that a merchant must write to integrate with new payment products.
> 
> +1
> 
>> Removal of the need for a merchant to hold on to sensitive customer data.
> 
> +0.8, what about s/hold on to/handle/ ?
> 
>> Greatly reduced payment provider switching costs for customers and merchants.
> 
> +1
> 
>> Does not add (ideally reduces) the time required to make a payment
> 
> +1
> 
> I think we should start collecting timing statistics for how long it
> takes to check out at popular online stores both with and without a
> pre-created user account.
> 
>> Enables value-added services to help payers
> 
> +0.5 - while I agree with the statement, it feels a bit too vague. What
> about:
> 
> Enables a vibrant value-added service ecosystem to be built into
> customer-facing payment software.
> 
>> Requires as little new technology and as few standards as possible
> 
> +1
> 
>> Enables anyone to understand what they are doing (esp. its cost) when they make a payment to another person (or system or company or object)
> 
> +0.5, vague.
> 
> "understand what they are doing" is a bit vague.
> s/to another person (or system or company or object)//
> 
> What about:
> 
> Enables payers to understand the details of a payment, especially the
> associated costs and fees.
> 
>> Does not interfere with the ability to meet regulatory requirements
> 
> +0.6, what about:
> 
> Does not interfere with the ability to meet regulatory requirements, and
> in some instances, smooths the regulatory compliance process for all
> parties involved.
> 
>> Enables people to "take their money out of the system"
> 
> -1, too vague. What do you mean by "take their money out of the system".
> Possible readings are:
> 
> - Make it easy to do ATM withdrawals.
> - Help Julian Assange not have his accounts frozen.
> - Integrate nicely government taxation authorities in streamlining
>  processes like VAT collection, etc.
> 
>> Can be delegated to an "agent" (device, automated process, etc).
> 
> +0.8, reword to:
> 
> Enables the payment process to be delegated to a software agent
> (personal device, cloud automated process, etc.).
> 
> Overall, I like the list. I'm also concerned that it feels like a grab
> bag of "things we wish were better" and it's length makes it feel like a
> wall of text when you see it for the first time. I don't know if anyone
> else had that concern when looking at the list for the first time?
> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: High-Stakes Credentials and Web Login
> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/identity-credentials/
> 
> 

--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447

Received on Thursday, 26 February 2015 03:33:13 UTC