Re: Review of Payment Apps Proposal

On 04/21/2016 11:36 AM, Dave Longley wrote:
> On 04/21/2016 07:54 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie wrote:
>> There is a concern from the browser API spec editors that we should
>> keep registration in a separate spec so that the payment and
>> registration specs can evolve independently. I think there is a 
>> case to be made that these should be in the same spec as they 
>> relate to the same component (the browser) and the sections of the 
>> spec that relate to each function can still evolve independently.
> I agree that for Payment App registration with the browser -- it 
> should be in a browser API spec. There may be other ways to register 
> Payment Apps (non-browsers) and those should be in their own 
> respective specs. However, if it makes more sense to break up the 
> browser API into a number of "Browser API Specs" I think that's ok
> as well.

I disagree strongly. I don't think it's okay for the registration API to
be separate from the browser API. Registration ensures that we have a
level playing field, and without it only the browser vendors provide the
mechanism for registering payment apps. To put this another way, I don't
think any API (either browser or HTTP) should go to REC w/o registration
also going to REC at the same time.

I'd loathe to see payment apps be required to be registered with the
Play Store, Microsoft Store, or Apple Store as the only way of providing
a payment app in this ecosystem. Without registration going to REC at
the same time as the Browser API, we are in that scenario by default.

This is a cynical view, but I'd rather plan for the worst than expect
the best out of large multinational corporations that own almost half of
the market in question. :)

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: The Web Browser API Incubation Anti-Pattern

Received on Thursday, 21 April 2016 15:51:52 UTC