Re: WP WG Charter review (zach)

LGTM, although the repetition of the phrase "based on" feels a bit clumsy.
Could it be:
..."innovation and differentiation from value-added services based on
location, mobile banking, marketing relationships..."

On 16 July 2015 at 19:25, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:

>
> > On Jul 13, 2015, at 7:33 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10 July 2015 at 13:34, Zach Koch <zkoch@google.com> wrote:
> > Hi all -
> >
> > I had an AI from the call on Monday to review the working group draft
> charter. Comments:
> >
> > Easier integration of new payment schemes by payment service providers,
> increasing merchant acceptance.
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand fully how this goal will be realized,
> especially given the planned deliverables. What is being proposed that
> would make it easier for, say, Stripe (payment service provider) to accept
> Bitcoin (new payment scheme)?
> >
> >
> > This standard will make it easier for payer and payee to agree on a
> payment instrument and because the dicovery process is using machine
> readable messages (lists of instruments) the list can be very long. This
> means payment service providers like Stripe could add new supported
> instruments and merchants don't have to do anything (potentially).
> >
> > As a merchant, I simply integrate with Stripe and then every time they
> add a new instrument it automatically gets sent up in the payment
> initiation request.
> >
> > So, to some extent you are right. The integration by the service
> providers is not necessarily easier but the merchant experience and
> increased number of instruments merchants can accept is a big benefit.
> >
> > Happy to reword this, any suggestions?
>
> This is a good question from Zach. Zach do you have any suggested wording?
> (I don’t have any yet.)
>
> >
> >
> > Increased scope for digital wallet innovation by banks, retailers,
> mobile operators, card networks, and other wallet providers
> >
> > Same fundamental comment as above. How are we affecting the innovation
> that is possible by banks, retailers, etc given planned deliverables?
> >
> > Per my last mail, I think we are allowing a wallet vendors to be very
> innovative and find ways to add value to their wallet services as a
> differentiators from the competition. I expect all of these (banks,
> retailers, mobile operators, card networks) to want to be wallet vendors.
>
> I read Zach’s comment this way: what are we doing (e.g., standardized
> hooks) that directly increases the means of innovation? I’m not sure that
> we are doing anything that has a direct impact. However, by lowering the
> cost of deployment we may increase the overall size of the wallet market,
> and competition will drive innovation.
>
> If, on the other hand, we are creating standards that will directly foster
> innovation, we should say how.
>
> I’ve changed the bullet to:
>
>  "        <li>Easier deployment of <a href="#wallets">digital wallets</a>
> from banks, retailers, mobile operators,
>             card networks, and other providers, enabling innovation and
> differentiation based on value-added services based on location, mobile
> banking, marketing relationships, and so on.
>         </li>"
>
>
> Ian
>
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>
>
>
>