Note on CfC

Hi all,

I apologize for dropping off the call this afternoon before this topic was
dealt with. I want to make two points clear from my perspective as the
chair and in response to Manu's blog post about publishing HTTP API and
Core Messages.

1. Publishing is a more significant step than is being asserted.

If we publish these specs all members of the WG must take time to both
review the specs and assess their company's IP holdings to ensure they make
the necessary disclosures and exclusions related to this new work.

This means it is not possible for this work to be done in parallel unless
it continues as editor's drafts. There is nothing preventing the editors
and any prospective implementors continuing to work on these deliverables
as editor's drafts and little to be gained for that group by having the
specs published.

Publishing this work necessarily forces the WHOLE group to invest time in
these deliverables which is exactly what the editors agreed they would not
do when the proposals were adopted as editor's drafts.

While I acknowledge that we originally agreed to postpone this work until
June, given that nobody else in the group but the editors has expressed any
interest in the work, I think it is justified that this is postponed
further until the higher priority work is complete.

2. This CfC is not about IF it is about WHEN

The majority of the group seems content that we should do this work.
However the debate about whether we are mandated to do so or not based upon
our charter has been a red herring that has distracted from the crux of
this vote. This vote is not about IF we should do the work it is about
whether it is right for us to publish this work NOW.

I appeal to the editors to put their own interests aside for a few months
and focus on helping the group get the priority work done so that we can
refocus on HTTP API when we have got payment request, payment apps and
payment method identifiers to CR.

Adrian