- From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 08:25:59 -0500
- To: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <56FD24CC.70804@w3.org>
On 3/31/2016 3:26 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote: > On 2016-03-31 03:34, Manu Sporny wrote: >> I've just published a blog post regarding the first four months of the >> Web Payments Working Groups somewhat rough operation. It tries to >> analyze what went right and what went wrong with the way we approached >> the creation of the first set of specifications around payments at W3C. >> >> http://manu.sporny.org/2016/browser-api-incubation-antipattern/ >> >> We should keep these lessons in mind before we try to launch any more >> Working Groups via the Web Payments Interest Group. > > > IMO, the Web Payment IG, WG, and CG share a common problem: > > A browser is like an operating system which executes potentially very > different applications. Operating system vendors usually try to limit > the footprint of their APIs as much as possible by offering a set of > low-level "primitives" which applications builders can use. > > I never saw a discussion which aimed finding such primitives in spite of > this being an area where standardization organizations like W3C excel. I tried to start at least a taxonomy which could be used to bear on this problem [1]. Unfortunately, we have been so consumed with the press of daily business that we have not made much progress, with the exception of the excellent work being done by Dom in Media. [1] https://www.w3.org/blog/2014/10/application-foundations-for-the-open-web-platform/ [2] http://dontcallmedom.github.io/mediartc-roadmap/ > > Web Payments rather belong to the application space and there are very > few signs of a genuine interest in standardizing such applications. > Given the field's relative immaturity it is probably way too early as well. > > Anders >
Received on Thursday, 31 March 2016 13:26:07 UTC