- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 08:04:18 -0600
- To: Frank Hoffmann <frank.hoffmann@klarna.com>
- Cc: Bazin Pascal <Pascal.Bazin@gemalto.com>, Payments WG <public-payments-wg@w3.org>
> On Mar 3, 2017, at 2:26 AM, Frank Hoffmann <frank.hoffmann@klarna.com> wrote: > > Hi Ian, not much to add > > Code examples: > * Use Cases #4. confirmaation -> confirmation I’m not seeing this. What is the URL of that page? > * Should we add a dedicated use case for "App that handles a proprietary payment method" or will this be covered by the other use cases? That seems reasonable. (But still not sure where the examples are you are referring to) > > Invocation > * I understand the decision regarding what information the payment app receives as "we should not reuse the Payment API request object". But there is no decision on what information should be sent to the payment app. Is this correct? The current consensus is the information that is listed in the draft specification: https://w3c.github.io/webpayments-payment-apps-api/#sec-app-request However, we still have an open issue on whether “line items” reach the payment app or under what conditions. > > Recommended payment apps > "browser chrome" is used in point two. I assume this should be generic for all browsers and not Chrome specific? I use the word “chrome” here to mean “UI native to the browser” (that is: not in the web page). I agree we need to be attentive to this usage in the specification. Ian -- Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 718 260 9447
Received on Friday, 3 March 2017 14:04:35 UTC