Re: Expectation to merge tokenization and 3DS task forces; upcoming schedule

Hi Laura,

> On Nov 7, 2018, at 5:56 PM, Laura Townsend <> wrote:
> Hey all, now that the conversation is blending SRC with 3DS and tokenization, I feel compelled to share our POV.  Representing the Merchant Advisory Group and 140 plus of our merchant members, we support W3C review of the SRC DRAFT spec to 1/understand how the 2 standards can co-exist for cards and 2/offer comments for potential incorporation into the SRC FINAL spec.  As I understood our Web Payments Working Group call last week, SRC specific discussions will take place in the Web Payments Working Group vs. the Tokenization/3DS Task Forces unless we feel there is pertinent info to bring forward to the task force as a result of the review.  Ian, please correct me.

It is my expectation that the first discussion will take place at the 15 November WPWG call. We can decide at that meeting where to have the subsequent discussion.

> As I understand it, tokenization is optional within SRC as designed in the draft spec although the card payment networks have made it clear both tokenization and 3DS will be integral to their individual implementations of SRC.  Despite the latter, the optionality still should keep the SRC conversation someone separate and distinct from the tokenization conversations within W3C.  In fact, a webinar I just saw this week continues to confirm that tokenization and 3DS are part of the payment environment which is not in scope of SRC but can be enabled through SRC participants.  I agree tokenization and 3DS are tools that support card payments today and the task forces have been pursuing efforts already to evaluate how the PR API can support both of these EMVCo specifications.  (Ian, again correct me if that is not accurate).

That is correct.

>  These are all separate and distinct payment technologies that should be able to standalone as well as work together depending on the participating stakeholder preferences.
> All that being said, MAG does not  support concentration of efforts on EMVCo SRC interoperability in isolation or priority at the expense of other alternatives that offer choice and competition. If there are other prevalent in-market or not yet commercialized alternatives that support ACH, direct debit, or otherwise, W3C should engage in parallel with the same level of commitment.  I agree the demand for clarity regarding SRC is true but the broad market demand for SRC is TBD.  The challenge with a parallel path is to ensure there are no conflicts in direction.

I am awaiting final confirmation from the co-Chairs, but my current expectation is that we will talk about credit transfers at the 29 November call. Please stay tuned for
that explicit agenda and invitation.


Ian Jacobs <>
Tel: +1 718 260 9447

Received on Thursday, 8 November 2018 00:39:23 UTC