Re: A first draft of the future Web Payments Interest group is available for comments

Manu,  An audience hierarchy as you suggest would be a terrible way to
go, and I think you haven't considered the implications.

Let me expand on the current foundational terminology in the payments
field. UNCITRAL distinguishes two systems for the management of
electronic transferable records (their most generic term):
“registry-based” and “token-based”. A registry contains information
about the electronic transferable records including “the
identification of a sole owner of the record and of the rights
incorporated in that record at any time”. In contrast, a token is an
original and unique record, with which a transfer of rights is
accomplished through transfer of control over the record itself. A
token-based system for electronic payments is similar in its basic
procedures to a paper-based payments system. (UNCITRAL, 2012, p. 7) A
registry-based payments system implements control via the management
of verifiable unique identities; a token-based payments system
implements control via the management of verifiable unique tokens.

Source: UNCITRAL. (2012). Legal issues relating to the use of
electronic transferable records (Version dated 17 August 2012). United
Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), Working
Group IV (Electronic Commerce). Forty-sixth Session, Vienna, 29
October-2 November 2012. United Nations General Assembly
(A/CN.9/WG.IV/WP.118). Retrieved from
https://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/workinggroups/wg_4/WG4-WP_118_e.pdf

Okay, one might say that's for "their geeks". But here's how a good
general interest dictionary defines "electronic token"
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/business-english/e-token
(Meanwhile FWIW, the various BTC, XRP and Ven systems are functionally
a little like toke ring LANs, so I'm not sure what confusion Tobie was
referring to.)

I'm surely coming across as awfully stubborn on this point, and I'm
quite aware that I'm just one voice. Nothing more. However since the
Paris workshop I've committed some genuinely open-minded effort into
trying to find (i.e. not 'make up') through discussion with
specialists, and in published works from different fields, a term or
phrase that can hold equivalent semantic legitmacy across all the
disciplines concerned with web payments, without resorting to
declaring that this community is more important than that community,
and surely last of all those pesky lawyers!  :-)  So I'm coming back
to the list with a suggestion supported by specific external direct
authoritative references (from parties not at the table).

Web payments is a multidisciplinary topic, and in the payments
business, it's probably unwise to put the lawyers last in line. (I am
not a lawyer.)  On something as key "what sorts of things will this
system be handling", I recommend generally that we make the proactive
attempt to identify terms and phrases that can hold equivalent
semantic legitmacy across all the disciplines concerned with web
payments.

Joseph


On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> On 05/29/2014 04:17 PM, floris.kleemans@nl.abnamro.com wrote:
>> Within my daily work as a strategist for a bank, we tend to use the
>> term non-traditional currencies. This is an easy term that could
>> apply to non-fiat money, digital, virtual and cryptocurrencies, all
>> the way to for instance loyalty points (transferable items that carry
>> value and could be used for purchases).
>
> +1, seems to deal w/ the issues that both Joseph and Tobie raised.
>
> We should keep the audience for the charter in mind as well, which is
> (IMHO) these communities, in this order: the W3C community, the
> broader Web/Internet technology community, the financial sector, the
> general public, regulators and law makers.
>
> We shouldn't get hung up on this terminology, especially since there is
> confusion around exactly what these new math/network-based are (with no
> end in sight). Whatever we pick is going to cause some amount of
> confusion, and this one phrase, whatever it ends up being, isn't going
> to derail the work. We will have to translate what we mean to other
> groups from time to time, which is why Joseph is our liaison to groups
> like UNCITRAL.
>
> I do think that using "electronic tokens" is going to be more confusing
> than "cryptocurrency", so if there is push-back on "cryptocurrency",
> "non-traditional currencies" seems to be a good middle-ground.
>
> We should mention "cryptocurrencies" somewhere in the charter because we
> need to discuss how they fit into the work we intend to do and we
> need to make that intent clear.
>
> -- manu
>
> --
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments
> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/
>



-- 
Joseph Potvin
Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
jpotvin@opman.ca
Mobile: 819-593-5983

Received on Friday, 30 May 2014 16:45:02 UTC