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

Re: Call for Consensus to Publish a Group Note- RESPONSE REQUESTED by 29 November 2017

From: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:46:15 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAci2aC7Zv=jAeqSAdGwHu8ZFzZvSU6fu0YMP2ufOyhKJAhXrg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Cc: Payments WG <public-payments-wg@w3.org>
On November 16, 2017 at 8:35:18 AM, Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) wrote:
> Based on consensus at our November face-to-face meeting [1], this is a Call for Consensus
> to publish the following specification as a Group Note rather than advancing it to Recommendation
> status:
> Web Payments HTTP API 1.0
> https://www.w3.org/TR/webpayments-http-api/

I'm supportive on the proviso that the spec is "gutted" (see [1], for
example). The working group is already using Note status to  signal
"this spec is mature" for Payment Methods (e.g., Basic Card). As such,
it would send the wrong signal to publish this as a Note when we have
no intention of working on it in the medium term.

Having said that, the spec could continue to live happily on Github as
an Editor's draft - though we should add a big red note telling the
community that we are not working on it.

> There was also consensus to:
> 1) keep in-scope for our next charter a payment request message structure for out-of-browser
> payments.
> 2) add a liaison to the IETF’s HTTP WG for discussion of HTTP-initiated payment requests.

Sounds fine - but we should put some kind of time limit on it. If we
don't commit to working on it by the next recharter, we should really
drop it or hand it to a community group to incubate it (my preference
is that that we hand it to a community group now).

So, my position is:

> 3. Request some changes, and do not support the proposal
> unless the changes are taken into account.

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/contacts-api/
Received on Thursday, 16 November 2017 02:46:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:43:27 UTC