Re: Ripple in Web Payments IG

On 2015-02-20 04:10, Manu Sporny wrote:
> On 02/18/2015 05:24 AM, chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:
>> 18.02.2015, 13:02, "Anders Rundgren"
>> <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>:
>>> On 2015-02-18 10:52, chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:
>>>> This is inappropriate, insulting, and an apology would be in
>>>> order.
>>>
>>> Pardon for being overly critical.
>>
>> It isn't being overly critical that is inappropriate, it is making a
>>   statement that is apparently baseless and outright rude.
>
> I'd like to second what Chaals is saying here. This sort of behavior is
> unacceptable, needlessly creates ill will, and does not meet the
> standard that the Web Payments CG has set over the years for treating
> our members and members in other groups with respect.
>
> Attacking a group that is aligned with us helps no one.

True, I apologize for that.

>
> Propose technical solutions

Done.  Typically gets like zero feedback.


> and solid strategies.

As a former entrepreneur [1] I disagree with the idea of doing everything,
I would rather focus on doing one thing right.

It could be Bitcoins which has the advantage that it doesn't require buy-in
from banks and probably is fairly simple tech-wise.

Another variant would be to get away from CNP on the web.  This is my personal favorite but
if you had followed this project [2], it is pretty clear that it wouldn't work in practice
since a possible deliverable would simply be too late.  The phenomenal success of U2F shows
that speed is more important than ever!


> Document them. Do implementations.

Done + Done. Now I'm continuing with Chrome Native Messaging.


> Gather support around your ideas and push them forward.
> That's what we need right now.

IMHO, the IG needs a more focused plan which is better aligned with what the
W3C have been successful with in the past which is creating consensus around
core web technology rather than applications.  That doesn't invalidate the
huge work with use-cases because the use-cases will point to technology gaps.

Going beyond that step is an entirely different ball-game, not particularly
suited for an SDO.

Anders

1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAR_Systems
2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-identity/2011Nov/0030.html


>
> -- manu
>

Received on Saturday, 21 February 2015 07:41:14 UTC