W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > August 2014

Web Payments Telecon Minutes for 2014-08-27

From: <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 12:56:25 -0400
Message-Id: <1409158585425.0.20628@zoe>
To: Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
Thanks to Dave Longley for scribing this week! The minutes
for this week's Web Payments telecon are now available:


Full text of the discussion follows for W3C archival purposes.
Audio from the meeting is available as well (link provided below).

Web Payments Community Group Telecon Minutes for 2014-08-27

  1. IGF 2014 - The Payments, Policing, Privacy Paradox Workshop
  2. Australian Internet Governance Forum
  3. Credentials CG
  4. Use Cases: Initiating Payments
Action Items:
  1. Tim Holborn to contact Stephane Boyera about Credentials CG 
    being added to Web Payments IG Charter.
  Manu Sporny
  Dave Longley
  Dave Longley, Manu Sporny, Pindar Wong, David I. Lehn, Timothy 
  Holborn, Evgeny Vinogradov

Dave Longley is scribing.
Manu Sporny:  Any updates/changes to the Agenda?
Pindar Wong:  Nope
David I. Lehn:  Nothing from me.
Manu Sporny:  If we could get an update later from Tim Holborn on 
  his experience at the Australian IGF, that would be good. We 
  should also discuss the first Credentials CG call.

Topic: IGF 2014 - The Payments, Policing, Privacy Paradox Workshop

Manu Sporny:  Pindar sent a link to the mailing list about IGF
Manu Sporny: 
Manu Sporny:  There is a youtube channel with a playlist on 
  people that have submitted videos
Manu Sporny: 
Manu Sporny:  We have videos from Louise Bennett from BCS, Jeremy 
  Malcolm from EFF, Mary Bold from Accreditrust, and an intro video 
  I did
Pindar Wong:  I had a video done last week, unfortunately the 
  wrong format, having that reviewed, my goal is to get the most 
  out of the audience, i'll be the moderator so will be focused on 
  keeping the discussion going. I'm a little concerned about 
  finding another moderator for the online portion. I just wanted 
  to make sure that/point out on the this call we are separating 
  the tech and policy issues. We're trying to get a much wider 
  sense of what some of the inputs should be to the technology side 
  of things. The IGF is actually the interplay between the two 
  (tech + policy). Tuesday, I drafted an online survey which I will 
  submit for review,  after the 1.5 hour session those who want to 
  continue the discussion. I'd also like to collect some 
  statistics, using the survey on the use cases themselves.
Manu Sporny:  There's an agenda there on the schedule, first an 
  intro to web identity by panelists, then review some use cases we 
  have, that's group discussion for 30 minutes, then privacy, 
  regulatory concerns 30 minute discussion, then gov't input for 
  around 15 minutes.
Manu Sporny:  That the same agenda you're looking for?
Pindar Wong:  Yes, changing that would be problematic, but i'm 
  open to seeing the responses from the room
Pindar Wong:  It's group work, it's not a panel presentation. 
  We'll benefit from getting a meeting of the minds. We want to get 
  the best input from the experience in the room. We can then 
  highlight some of the issues by going through the use cases, that 
  might help ground the discussion.
Manu Sporny:  My concern is what happens if we have deadspace 
  between discussions or if people are being shy hopefully we can 
  help prime the discussion, i don't know if this is really a 
  problem at the IGF, the sessions i went to last year had no 
  shortage of people speaking, maybe my concern is misplaced, maybe 
  we don't need as much prep, maybe we don't need a long list of 
  questions to ask the audience.
Pindar Wong:  My role as moderator is to keep the discussion 
Pindar Wong:  Sorting through people's opinions, that will be 
  difficult. G getting a sense of the room and the relevant topics, 
  anonymity, high-value payments and identity, etc. What i am 
  concerned about is getting the right mix of people in the room 
  and that can only be done on the ground in Istanbul. I know for, 
  example Mark Nottingham will be there. The IGF experience is that 
  we'll have the right people there at the conference. I'm not 
  concerned with dead time, but my role as moderator is to fill 
  that with questions
Pindar Wong:  You shouldn't have to worry too much with your prep 
  and just share your experience
Pindar Wong:  Some of the stuff you wrote in the last 24 hours in 
  the credentials CG, for example, is really good
Pindar Wong:  I do have one slide that is exhaustive that is my 
  own view, where people can jump off and i'm hoping we can include 
  the questionnaire in that.
Pindar Wong:  Getting people to participate with the survey will 
  be hard, but let's just keep it loose don't stress too much.
Manu Sporny:  Any other comments or questions about next week's 
Timothy Holborn:  At the last years IGF there was a question 
  about copyright around media companies, like the MPAA. There was 
  talk of privacy, and how the internet would be regulated. I got 
  the feeling that there's pressure coming from the MPAA and there 
  aren't broadly aware of linked data and privacy topics and what 
  sort of opportunity there is to create solutions.
Manu Sporny:  A quick follow up on that, someone from the RIAA 
  (David Hughes, VP of Technology, RIAA) will be there at the 
  workshop next week, so we should make sure to engage them as much 
  as possible.
Manu Sporny:  He's heavily involved in this space... it will be 
  good to have that from the copyright policy side of things.
Timothy Holborn:  It's a problem for every internet user, they 
  may think of themselves of an individual beyond the needs of an 
  organization, in the knowledge economy all entities have value. 
  The the lack of understanding of linked data at AuIGF was pretty 
Manu Sporny:  Outside of the semantic web community many people 
  don't know or understand how Linked Data works, there's quite a 
  bit of education and outreach we have to do in this area.

Topic: Australian Internet Governance Forum

Timothy Holborn: AuIGF in australia went very well.  
  http://www.igf.org.au/venue-schedule I spoke / participated on 
  the “Is the digital age facilitating global citizenship?” panel, 
  and received remarkable feedback.
Timothy Holborn: My main points that i brought forward, related 
  to the concept of ‘what is the web you want’ (following from the 
  Web We Want momentum, campaign, etc.)
Timothy Holborn:  I arranged different questions relating to the 
  use of W3C standards, getting across this notion of the Web we 
  Want, which surfaces the rationale of why Web 3 is important. It 
  provides opportunities for traditional systems Web 2 did not. 
  Today, I was asked to state in one of the forums there were a 
  range of people involved in UN activities, and one of the ideas 
  that was floated was the idea of an international Web parliament. 
  Some of the greatest minds at AuIGF were not very technical. A 
  lot of people thinking about it from Web 2 point of view not Web 
  3. What opportunities exist when you don't need central silos 
  anymore. These are the opportunities that web payments provide.
Manu Sporny:  I think that at least reflects our experience with 
  the IGF meeting last year, there's a pretty big divide between 
  the technical understanding and the policy discussion, but that's 
  exactly why we're going to the IGF to bridge that gap of what 
  types of policies we should be aware of
Manu Sporny:  Thanks tim, you have some follow up to do?
Timothy Holborn:  An enormous amount of follow up and looking 
  forward to working with all of you on it. I was happy to see much 
  more Australian participation, it was a great day.
Manu Sporny:  Thanks Tim, if there is nothing else on AuIGF then 
  we'll continue with the agenda

Topic: Credentials CG

Manu Sporny: 
Manu Sporny:  We had a very good turn out for the first meeting, 
  we had ETS (Educational Testing Systems) who proctor 5 million 
  students through SAT, etc. college type tests, we had OpenBadge 
  Alliance a Mozilla spinoff for badges of achievement, etc., we 
  had the former Chief Information Officer for the state of Iowa, 
  he's very well known in gov't. We had a number of consultants 
  from private sector, we had Bailey from the web payments 
  community to write about tech/edit specs, etc.
Manu Sporny:  We run those calls exactly like we run these, 
  minuted, we have audio for it.
Manu Sporny:  The call next week is canceled next week due to 
  IGF, but the week after we'll go through use cases and 
Manu Sporny:  We'll be handing the identity use cases over to 
  that group and there's a larger consortium of groups that want to 
  see that work move forward, which is what we want, a broader 
  coalition working on that stuff.
Timothy Holborn: We haven't listed a liason relationship with 
  that group in the Web Payments IG charter: 
Dave Longley:  Not in that language, but there is a section on 
  identity there. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny]
Timothy Holborn: Well, it's listed here, but not in the charter: 
Dave Longley:  There is a section on reviewing identity systems, 
  see if new technology needs to be created, it's essentially what 
  the Credentials CG is working on. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny]
Timothy Holborn:  The Credentials CG is not in the liaison 
Dave Longley:  Oh, you're right.
Manu Sporny:  We should ping Stephane and get him to add it.

ACTION: Tim Holborn to contact Stephane Boyera about Credentials 
  CG being added to Web Payments IG Charter.

Topic: Use Cases: Initiating Payments

Manu Sporny: 
Dave Longley:  Right now we have - Use Case: A merchant 
  advertises different details, such as price, for an offer of sale 
  based on potential payment processor choice.
Manu Sporny: So feedback from Jorge: It makes a lot of sense, and 
  it happens a lot in online games, but maybe it would be hard to 
  define or predict 'potential choice' if the user is not even 
  registered but just browsing several sites to compare prices and 
  make an actual choice.
Manu Sporny: Input from Michael Williams: the two above that 
  allow the merchant to limit who can be a payment processor seems 
  like it would kill any small payment processors. i'd like to see 
  the ability to be your own payment processor as a use case. given 
  that there still needs to be a trusted third party between 
  merchant and buyer, maybe a middle ground is to allow the buyer 
  to choose a major payment processor listed by the merchant as a 
  trusted proxy for their preferred payment processor. 
  inter-processor transactions seem to be supported: 
Manu Sporny:  Let's take jorge's comment first
Manu Sporny:  Jorge's primary concern here is that it becomes 
  difficult for the customer to actually figure out what the actual 
  price is before they start initiating the transaction, which is 
  true, we could talk about the magical future where these offers 
  are auto-processed by the browser and shows you prices specific 
  to you, rather than a generalized price, so you see the full 
  price (plus tax, etc) immediately
Manu Sporny:  There are two levels of addressing this problem, 
  the first level is to not address his concern and say we're just 
  talking about the merchant to be able to provide an offer for 
  sale, it's just data, it's up to the user agent to figure out how 
  to show it to the user, the other potential response is to say 
  we've got offers on a page and we're thinking of writing another 
  spec to indicate how browsers should display that information to 
  a potential customer. I don't think we should do this, but for 
  example, if Google knew who all your payment processors were then 
  when you search it could show you a very customized search result 
  for all the prices for you, etc. for example if you only pay in 
  Bitcoin then everything you see in Google would be priced in 
  Bitcoin, etc
Manu Sporny:  Or if you did Bitcoin and yen you'd see prices in 
Timothy Holborn:  Is currency covered elsewhere?
Timothy Holborn:  For example, what happens if the merchant is 
  also the shipping company?
Manu Sporny:  The merchant can list multiple offers for sale, for 
  example, if you're using payment processor X you get a discount, 
  or it costs more, or the merchant can offer things for sale in 
  yen and euro
Timothy Holborn:  Is there still an issue with chargebacks on 
Manu Sporny:  This use case isn't about chargebacks
Timothy Holborn:  Someone might try something high up? If the 
  list of the merchants is incorrect?
Manu Sporny:  Let's just take a credit card as an example. The 
  merchant would price it higher because there might be 
  chargebacks, vs. Bitcoin with a lower price/value exchange where 
  there are no chargebacks.
Dave Longley:  We should keep in mind that this may not work at 
  all w/ credit cards (there are agreements that don't allow you to 
  change price based on credit card) [scribe assist by Manu Sporny]
Timothy Holborn:  I'm not sure if you can separate what sort of 
  instrument you're using
Timothy Holborn:  Is Paypal a different sort of financial 
  instrument to a credit card vs. bitcoin?
Timothy Holborn:  I'm not sure of the legalities of setting 
  different prices
Manu Sporny:  There are agreements in the US where most merchants 
  are not allowed to give discounts for cash if you also accept 
  credit cards, it's in their credit card agreement. So burden is 
  placed on the customer, if you pay for cash, you pay a higher 
  price than if the credit card system didn't exist (in effect).
Dave Longley:  There are also fights between different credit 
  cards as well... for example AmEx may charge a different fee vs. 
  Visa/Mastercard - different fee structures, it's a gray area. 
  [scribe assist by Manu Sporny]
Timothy Holborn:  I think we should separate the technical 
  problem from the business problem. We should be giving people a 
Pindar Wong:  You've got to separate tech from business problems, 
  this is very important in this case.
Manu Sporny:  I think you hit nail on the head Tim, we should 
  provide the option, some countries will be able to use it others 
  will not
Timothy Holborn: +1
Dave Longley:  I think all we can really do now is ensure that 
  the information is available in the offer of sale. We don't know 
  how the user agents are going to interface. As long as the offers 
  are in a standard format, that's what we need. [scribe assist by 
  Manu Sporny]
Dave Longley:  I think the PaySwarm specs already cover this 
  right now - different offers can be made for different payment 
  types. We're not going to be able to easily say we can support 
  the "clients see prices specific to them", we don't want 
  merchants to shotgun prices all over their pages (visible to 
  people). I'm in agreement, we can only put the information in the 
  offer right now. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny]
Dave Longley:  I don't think we're going to satisfactorily 
  respond to Jorge's feedback. There are two ways to respond to 
  this - we can't really respond to this, it's not something we can 
  do in the first version. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny]
Manu Sporny:  If we wanted to do something about this it requires 
  a pretty nasty stack of software to do it
Manu Sporny:  There are multiple ways this could work. The 
  assumption that Jorge is making here is that the merchant is not 
  going to have any sort of information on the customer so they 
  won't be able to show them a price that is custom tailored to 
  them, they won't see that price until they click the buy button. 
  I think that's a perfectly reasonable assumption to make.
Manu Sporny:  If we assume the merchant knows nothing about the 
  customer, then the smarts have to be built into the customer's 
Manu Sporny:  If we are going to do that, then we have to create 
  some kind of price-fetching API that links to your payment 
Manu Sporny:  Or we have to say that this piece of information on 
  the page is a variable and here is the offer and hand that to the 
  user agent to let them calculate it and put it on the page
Manu Sporny:  So i think the response to Jorge is: Yes, this is a 
  problem, we do just fine today without giving the customer an 
  exact price before going to their payment processor. It doesn't 
  change the state of things (status quo), but in the future, once 
  there are these offers on the page we can figure out some way to 
  link what's on the page to the offers that are embedded on them.
Manu Sporny:  But that's a whole other spec and i don't think 
  it's something we want to do
Dave Longley:  In the meantime, browsers might do that 
  automatically. Browsers could take the information and show the 
  price. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny]
Dave Longley:  We already have this built into the Payswarm 
  specs. You can request a quote from your payment processor, but 
  we'd need more to interface w/ a user agent (browser).
Manu Sporny:  Yeah, you'd need a whole API for displaying prices 
  on a page given the customer's payment processor information.
Manu Sporny:  The thing we want to focus on is the expression of 
  the linked data offer so we can focus on that in the future
Evgeny Vinogradov:  This is really about looking for a 
  description of a product for sale. The offer - a few things can 
  be added to it, taxes, shipping fees and so on, discounts based 
  on payments processors, etc. It's not about finding the optimal 
  offer just about describing the discount/offer. It is only about 
  adding a few more lines to an offer, not complicated in the 
  general case.
Manu Sporny:  I think that's exactly right, we don't want to get 
  into the technical details of it now, like does a merchant create 
  multiple offers or just one offer with all of the possible 
  options in it? Does the offer contain a coupon code, etc. all 
  that, we're talking about a data expression problem not a UI 
  problem and I think Jorge is concerned about the UI problem.
Timothy Holborn:  What if the payment processor was also a 
  shipping company.
Timothy Holborn:  Rather than getting the product shipped by the 
  merchant and the payer gets it shipped by the payment processor 
  for the same txn. That perhaps wouldn't happen at all if we 
  weren't able to offer this functionality?
Timothy Holborn:  This is all non-trivial work, we could have an 
  entire Working Group focused on just product offers.
Manu Sporny:  Everything we're discussing revolves around the 
  ability to express different offers, i think the use case needs 
  to change at this point
Manu Sporny:  I think the use case is about more than being able 
  to just list different prices based on payment processor
Manu Sporny:  I think we're really talking about parametric 
  offers, you pay different prices based on discounts, shipping, a 
  whole host of things, a merchant provides different offers based 
  on discount codes, payment processor choice, etc.
Timothy Holborn:  Parametric pricing is a fantastic term. This is 
  a whole field, this would indicate it's non-trivial work.
Manu Sporny:  We need to be careful not to let this distract us, 
  we could spend months on it, we just want to figure out the first 
  set of parameters we want to support and expand later.
Pindar Wong:  Could we do it the other direction, for example a 
Manu Sporny:  Yeah, we've discussed this smart contract stuff 
  before. It's something big happening in the cryptocurrency space 
  now. We haven't spec'd any of that out yet, it's a different 
  negotiation process, a different payment flow.
Manu Sporny:  Basically, an Offer is something a merchant puts on 
  their site. A Bid is something a person puts on their blog. Then, 
  for example, Google or Yandex could come along, get all the Bids 
  and match them up to offers. You could also transmit a bid to a 
  decentralized network of sorts.  This all falls under "smart 
  contract" territory, which is fairly new, and we should wait for 
  the dust to settle there before trying to standardize on 
Manu Sporny:  The whole bit about finding all the bids and offers 
  is probably a version 2 thing.
Manu Sporny:  You at least need an Offer mechanism for that to 
  happen. Someone places a bid on internet/web and someone makes an 
  offer and sends directly to the software agent operating on 
  behalf of the person.
Manu Sporny:  For the bidding process to happen you need a 
  functioning offer process
Pindar Wong:  Got it
Dave Longley:  Another way to look at it is that a bid may just 
  end up being a counter-offer. The merchant's software could 
  accept that and match it up to their offer and accept. [scribe 
  assist by Manu Sporny]
Timothy Holborn:  Where do we mention v2 use cases?
Manu Sporny:  We have a section on the wiki for it, at the 
Manu Sporny:  I'll try to add all this stuff (add v2 use cases) 
  and modify the use case to talk about parametric offers.
Timothy Holborn: Assessability and what is required for that is 
  important - what's the value of the bid.
Manu Sporny: Let's chat quickly about Michael William's concern, 
  that this favors large payment processors. He's right, it does 
  right now and we don't have a clear solution. We did start 
  PaySwarm out by saying that there would be a decentralized 
  clearing process. The banks aren't interested in that part of the 
  work, as far as we can tell. Just look at the trouble that Ripple 
  and Bitcoin are facing when it comes to adoption at big banks - 
  we all know that sort of stuff is the future, but if we threw 
  decentralized clearing into this, it would probably not fly. So, 
  we need a way for small payment processors to compete, but how do 
  merchants accept payments from small payment processors? How do 
  they trust that their money is there? Ultimately, I think we're 
  going to have to have some decentralized payment system as an 
  option for the smaller players. So, you either trust the top 10 
  payment processor digital signatures on the digital receipts, or 
  you can trust a small payment processor digital signature because 
  you can check to see that the payment went through almost 
  immediately via some decentralized query. The question is, is 
  there a body that ensure that these small payment processors are 
  liquid? How do you stop bad players, companies that go bankrupt? 
  So, there is a big policy side to this discussion, and right now, 
  we don't have a good answer for Michael other than "We know this 
  is a problem, we will have failed if we don't increase 
  competition in the space." We'll have to start a discussion 
  around this on the mailing list.
Manu Sporny:  That's it for the call today, the call for next 
  week is canceled. We'll start again the week of September 9th.
Pindar Wong: Thanks everyone!
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2014 16:56:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:03:38 UTC