Re: [webpayments] Should Payment Method Identifiers be a Linked Data Vocabulary? (#29)

Is there some clever way we can leverage the Schema.org work here too?
Create community-defined vocabularies for the various common terms that we
are using all over the place so they have semantic meaning everywhere
instead of just within our own protocols and messaging?

On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Manu Sporny <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> The Payment Method Identifiers
> <http://wicg.github.io/paymentrequest/specs/method-identifiers.html> spec
> states:
>
> The PaymentRequest API requires that merchants supply a list identifiers
> for supported payment methods. This document defines those identifier
> strings and how they are created.
>
> The two sets of spec proposals agree that:
>
>    - There should be a list of identifiers for payment methods.
>    - There should be shared attributes across payment apps and methods.
>    - There should be short names for payment methods.
>    - We should support distributed extensibility.
>
> This sounds an awful lot like a Linked Data vocabulary. Is it?
>
> This is related to #25 <https://github.com/w3c/webpayments/issues/25>
> Payment Method Identifier Registry.
>
> Spec refs:
>
> http://wicg.github.io/paymentrequest/specs/method-identifiers.html#introduction
>
> http://web-payments.github.io/web-payments-messaging/#payment-instrument-registration
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/w3c/webpayments/issues/29>.
>



-- 
Shane McCarron
halindrome@gmail.com


---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webpayments/issues/29#issuecomment-162361577