Re: CfC to publish documents as FPWD of the Web Payments WG

+1 to all documents from nic.br


On 04/05/2016 04:29 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie wrote:
>
> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish one or more documents as 
> First Public Working Drafts (FPWD) of the Web Payments Working Group.
>
>   * Proposal 1: Publish "Payment Request API" as a FPWD
>       o https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/0d1d5d7ff0f1bb7b37970994f1eb719101aaccbc/fpwd/paymentrequest.html
>   * Proposal 2: Publish "Payment Request API Architecture" as a FPWD
>       o https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/0d1d5d7ff0f1bb7b37970994f1eb719101aaccbc/fpwd/architecture.html
>   * Proposal 3: Publish "Payment Method Identifiers" as a FPWD
>       o https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/0d1d5d7ff0f1bb7b37970994f1eb719101aaccbc/fpwd/method-identifiers.html
>   * Proposal 4: Publish "Basic Card Payment" as a FPWD
>       o https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/0d1d5d7ff0f1bb7b37970994f1eb719101aaccbc/fpwd/basic-card-payment.html
>
> For each proposal:
>
>   * We invite responses on this thread to each of the proposals.
>   * Silence will be taken to mean there is no Formal Objection [1],
>     but positive responses are encouraged. Publication as a FPWD does
>     NOT indicate that a document is complete or represent Working
>     Group consensus.
>   * If there are no Formal Objections by 12 April 2016 (1pm EDT), the
>     proposal will carry and the Chairs will request that the Director
>     approve publication as FPWD(s).
>
> The W3C Director takes Formal Objections seriously, and therefore they 
> typically require significant time and effort to address. Therefore, 
> please limit any Formal Objections to issues related to the scope of 
> these documents rather than technical content where the Working Group 
> has not yet made a decision. Please include substantive arguments or 
> rationale for consideration by the Director.
>
> If there are Formal Objections, the Chairs plan to contact the 
> individual(s) who made the Formal Objection to see whether there are 
> changes that would address the concern and increase consensus to 
> publish. Depending on the number and nature of the Formal Objections, 
> the Chairs will either make a decision either to pursue FPWD and 
> report the Formal Objections to the Director (as required by W3C 
> Process), or to postpone publication until there is greater consensus 
> to publish.
>
> If there is a decision not to publish a document, we will adjust our 
> communications to let people know about the Editor's Drafts and the 
> decision to delay their publication as FPWDs.
>
> NOTES:
>
>   * Publication of a FPWD is a signal to the broader community that we
>     are seeking review of the specification(s) in their early stages.
>     To frame that discussion, we plan to publish a blog post with the
>     publication:
>       o https://www.w3.org/2016/03/15-wpwg-blog.txt
>   * Publication of a FPWD triggers an event under the W3C Patent Policy.
>   * The Working Group discussed this Call for Consensus at its 17
>     March 2016 teleconference
>       o https://www.w3.org/2016/03/17-wpwg-minutes
>
> For the Chairs, Adrian Hope-Bailie
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#Consensus
>

-- 
-yaso


Centro de Tecnologias Web
W3C Escritório Brasil
NIC.br - CGI.br
Skype: yasocordova
Phone: 55 11 5509-3537 (4025)