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: Michel Weksler <michel.weksler@airbnb.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:58:01 +0000
Message-ID: <CACJH5UB-Fkemc=pmg1UPg1qEZ50faLY2qAb=9Qut1U1wNDFyyg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Cc: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, Payments WG <public-payments-wg@w3.org>
I am not sure I fully understand Marco's proposal or Ian's agreement -
apologies if I am being very thick here, but would one of you mind
clarifying?

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 5:59 AM Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:

>
> > On Nov 15, 2017, at 8:46 PM, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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.
>
> Agreed.
>
> Ian
>
> >
> > 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/
>
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
> https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
> Tel: +1 718 260 9447 <(718)%20260-9447>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
- Michel
Received on Thursday, 16 November 2017 22:58:36 UTC

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