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

Tokenization Task Force experimentations

From: Gildas Le Louarn <gildas.lelouarn@lyra-network.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 17:23:28 +0200 (CEST)
To: <public-payments-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00d301d33b92$661f07d0$325d1770$@lyra-network.com>
Hi WPWG and Tokenization Wiki Task Force

Even if I've never participated to Tokenization Task Force calls (personal
planning issue according recurring meeting time), I've taken time to
follow your discussions and I would request you a precision according
tokenization topic.

Because I'm newbie, don't hesitate to let me know if I'm not using the
right canal.

Looking for "encrypted_card"
https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-methods-tokenization/wiki/encrypted_car
d , it seems we don't talk about PaymentHandler storage as it was for
"gateway_params"
https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-methods-tokenization/wiki/gateway_param
s in case of "oneTimeUse"=false.

Am I true saying we probably won't cover such token storage because it
isn't the role of PaymentHandler to manage tokens storage and
authentication?

As Braintree we are concerned by "Encrypted Card Tokenization Extension"
giving direct access to our merchant to subsequent payment in two ways:

*         Offline usage for subscriptions.

*         Online usage with additional authentication (generally 3DS +
card security code).

As a consequence we are greatly interested to help the community to work
on encrypted card and more particularly on the extension use case. I
understood that some of us are working on such experimentations.

To avoid redundant work, do you think interesting for the community if we
work on tokenization extension experimentation taking into account
specificities of our merchants use cases?

Thank you,

Gildas.
Received on Monday, 2 October 2017 15:24:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 October 2017 15:24:58 UTC