- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 22:28:01 -0400
- To: Mountie Lee <mountie@paygate.net>, "public-webpayments-ig@w3.org" <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
On 06/21/2015 12:08 PM, Mountie Lee wrote: > I found it at > https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Payment_Architecture_Priorities That link above was mostly an attempt at organizing the existing use cases into versions. I wouldn't suggest that anyone take it as anything more than an educated guess on how each use case we have today could be organized into versions. This is the final list of use cases for version 1: https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/FTF_June2015/UseCasesForVersion1 The only use case that was dropped from version 1 was the Credentials use case, primarily because there wasn't a belief that it was critical path for version 1. That said, the breakout session on use cases found that while Credentials wasn't critical path for version 1, that a Credentials WG should be created in parallel primarily due to demand for a better way of doing KYC/AML across the financial industry. I think the feedback from the roundtable underscored this desire. The rest of the feedback will be integrated into the use case descriptions this week. For each use case, the roadmap will clarify if only a subset of a use case for version 1 is expected to be implemented (electronic receipts, for example, is only supposed to have very minimal support in version 1). Mountie, are you asking that we document /every/ use case that wasn't selected for version 1, or just the use cases that were considered and then removed for version 1? -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Web Payments: The Architect, the Sage, and the Moral Voice https://manu.sporny.org/2015/payments-collaboration/
Received on Monday, 22 June 2015 02:28:27 UTC