W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-payments-wg@w3.org > August 2017

[Agenda] 8 August Payment Apps Task Force teleconference

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 16:23:12 -0500
Message-Id: <672C3375-2F96-4239-AFB0-408D3F8CE958@w3.org>
To: Payments WG <public-payments-wg@w3.org>
Participants in the payments app task force,

We meet 8 August from 10-11am ET.

There's a lot happening so reviewing proposals
and joining the call would be greatly appreciated.

WebEx: 
http://www.w3.org/2017/01/paymentapps-2017.ics

Previous meeting: 25 July
 https://www.w3.org/2017/07/25-apps-minutes

Proposed next meeting: 22 August

Ian

==========
Agenda

* Edits since the previous meeting:
  - Removed wallets (per task force discussion)
  - Other minor cleanup to re-enable auto-publishing

* Add CanMakePaymentEvent and AbortPaymentEvent
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/pull/170

  We came close to merging this pull request to add
  two new event types to the specification. However,
  Adam Roach expressed privacy concerns. Let's
  discuss!

* Service workers example from Rouslan to illustrate
  how to publish two "wallets" from the origin. Should
  we add this example to the spec? Or to the developer
  portal? Are there issues with the example?
  https://github.com/rsolomakhin/rsolomakhin.github.io/blob/master/pr/sw.md

  I believe that once we've resolved what to do with the
  example, we can close issue 153.

* Issue 178: Default handler icon. Can we make progress on this?
  See Rouslan's proposal:
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/issues/178#issuecomment-309778321
  and my follow-up:
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/issues/178#issuecomment-309947884

* Issue 190: respondWith behavior not specified
  This has a pull request that has had some review:
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/pull/194

  Are we ok to merge the pull request?

  Also, does that pull request also address issue 191?
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/issues/191

* Issue 192: The Open Window Algorithm tries to access [[state]] of a
  request in a way that doesn't make sense
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/issues/192

  There is a pull request that has had some review:
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/pull/196

  Are we ok to merge the pull request?

* Pull request:  Add "Validate Methods Algorithm"
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/pull/197

  This is an important security-related pull request.
  It also creates a new dependency on the payment method
  manifest specification.

* Issue 116: Relation between merchant order of payment methods and
  payment app order of instruments.

  See Ian proposal for language (supported by Rouslan):
  https://github.com/w3c/payment-handler/issues/116#issuecomment-317890522

* Next meeting: Proposed 22 August.

--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel: +1 718 260 9447
Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2017 21:23:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:43:26 UTC