Re: Comments on W3C Web Payments Interest Group Charter from Federal Reserve

+1 to Stephane¹s remarks about loyalty and coupons.

Natasha Rooney | Web Technologist | GSMA | nrooney@gsma.com | +44 (0) 7730
219 765 | @thisNatasha | Skype: nrooney@gsm.org

7th Floor, 5 New Street Square, London EC4A 3BF







On 6/2/14, 21:32, "Stephane Boyera" <boyera@w3.org> wrote:

>Dear Claudia,
>
>thank you very much for your comments.
>See below some remarks:
>
>> *1.**Scope Statement:*
>
>I agree with almost all your points except:
>
>> b.Line 2 ­ Add the following to the list of payment methods in
>> parentheses‹i.e., ACH, debit cards, prepaid cards, e-checks.  Also,
>> delete the reference to ³coupon² as this isn¹t a payment method.
>> Consider also deleting ³Loyalty card² as this may or may not be a
>> payment method, depending on whether it is tied directly to the payment
>> itself.  In some cases a loyalty card is tied only to customer
>> information, rewards, or other items relevant to the customer/merchant
>> relationship and not the payment method itself.
>
>I believe we need to keep loyalty cards and coupons in the scope.
>what about separating payment methods in traditional payment methods,
>non-traditional currencies (aka cryptocurrencies or electronic tokens),
>and non-money-based payments (coupons, loyalty cards) ?
>
>about success criteria, this group is not in charge of implementing
>payment standards.
>The implementation of new standard for payments will be the success
>criteria of technical group(s) in charge of developing the considered
>standards (and it is a requirements in W3C process), but not the
>steering group. However, as you suggested, this group should include in
>its scope and activities the promotion of new web payments standards.
>
>concerning deliverables, I'm also ok with most of your points.
>I will clarify high-value authentication which means improved
>authentication using various technologies from multi-factor auth to
>secure-elements, smartcard-based auth.
>
>about
> > d.Under both topics #3, /Payment Transaction Messaging,/ and #4,
> > consider adding a new bullet that states, ³Leverage and/or reference
> > existing, relevant technical standards.
>
>I suggest to mention it clearly both in the scope and at the very
>beginning of the deliverable section because it is a critical element to
>highlight imho.
>what do you think?
>
>About the external liaison, i beleive the precision you are proposing
>are better than the general description, so i will update accordingly
>
>Best
>Stephane
>
>
>--
>Stephane Boyera        stephane@w3.org
>W3C                +33 (0) 6 73 84 87 27
>BP 93
>F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,
>France
>

This email and its attachments are intended for the above named only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please reply to this email or call +44 207 356 0600 and highlight the error.

Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2014 02:33:36 UTC