- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 07:43:50 -0500
- To: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
- Cc: Payments WG <public-payments-wg@w3.org>
> On May 9, 2017, at 4:01 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote: > > Ian, > > I think it would be useful to understand the full lifestyle of these different tokens so it's clearer who can issue and process them. > > With that clarity it becomes easier to determine where standardisation provides value. > > It also helps to understand who the various participants are that are involved and how the payment method must accommodate them. > > Is that lifestyle documented anywhere? Last week Sachin took an action item to create some diagrams that I hope will serve as a beginning of documentation. Ian > > Adrian > > On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 7:34 PM Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > The tokenization task force will meet tomorrow, 9 May, from 11:30amET to noon ET. > > Call information: > https://www.w3.org/2017/04/tokenization-tf.ics > > We will meet on irc.w3.org in #wpwg. > > At the last meeting [3] there was definitely interest in discussing and better understanding three token types (network, issuer, gateway). > Sachin took an action item to create some sequence diagrams for network and gateway tokens. If those diagrams are ready for > tomorrow’s call, they will help inform the discussion. > > Agenda: > > * Getting clarity around what problem we want to solve. For discussion purposes, here are some topics that we might > be trying to address: > > - Reducing checkout page code complexity by creating a common data abstraction across network, issuer, and gateway > tokens. Roy points out that the original draft of the tokenization spec [2] included all three token types but there was > pushback on the utility of including gateway tokens. What we heard at last week’s call and at the Chicago FTF meeting > is that people also want us to address gateway tokens, so we need to figure out what that means concretely. > > - Moving checkout page tokenization to payment apps. Would that increase security? Would parties tokenizing in libraries > on the merchant side today see value in earlier tokenization in payment apps? > > - Not yet discussed, but worth adding to this thread: in-browser tokenization. Any interest? Value? > > - W3C standard tokenization format. My sense is that this is not what people have thought we would be doing; I mention > it here mostly to get confirmation. > > Thanks! > > Ian > > [1] https://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-wpwg-minutes.html > [2] https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/webpayments/61843821cb991a06610cb97e564c16b7b644574c/proposals/tokenized_cards.html > [3] https://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-wpwg-minutes.html > -- > Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> > https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ > Tel: +1 718 260 9447 > > > > > > -- > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse any typos -- Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 718 260 9447
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2017 12:43:58 UTC