W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments-ig@w3.org > April 2015

Re: [glossary] Glossary Reference completer

From: <E.R.Fekkes@rn.rabobank.nl>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 12:37:48 +0000
To: <ij@w3.org>
CC: <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <99C52E05-140C-4781-B791-0A19E936FC0F@rn.rabobank.nl>
Hello Ian,

Thanks for your work on the structure of the Glossary document.
This way of structuring enables us to make the definitions more precise and adds the possibility to add examples and further references.

On the subject of examples, I think we must make a choice whether these belong to the Glossary or rather should be placed with the Use Cases. Examples in the Glossary may help to better understand the terminology, but the context of the terms is living in the Use Case document.

Best regards,


> Op 1 apr. 2015 om 21:11 heeft Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> het volgende geschreven:
>> On Mar 29, 2015, at 4:24 AM, E.R.Fekkes@rn.rabobank.nl wrote:
>> Daar all,
>> I have to send regrets for the upcoming IG teleconference.
>> However, work has been done on the Glossary Reference https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/GlossaryReference
>> The first column Use Case Term is aligned with the current FPWD document.
>> This column states the terms as used in the Use Case document.
>> The second and third columns on Industry Term(s) and References have been filled further.
>> References are taken from a number of sources, such as EMV specifications (cards), ISO20022 CAPE (cards), European Payments Councel (EPC) standardization Volume and two definitions from the UETP initiative of Floris Kleemans.
>> For virtual currencies, I have taken terminology from the latest ECB report.
>> Please review these terms and references, suggestions for further definitions are welcome.
>> I suggest to add a reference list as well as to point to the exact documents where the definitions are taken from.
> Hi Evert,
> Thank you for working on the glossary reference! Using your data, I tried a little experiment today to reformat your
> data and see if I could tease out some additional information (notably, relevant scheme):
> http://www.w3.org/2015/04/wpay-glossary.html
> Here’s how it works:
> * There’s a section for each one of our home-grown terms.
> * Within that section there’s a table of related terms. 
> * For each related term I try to provide:
>     * A definition
>     * A source for that definition
>     * How it relates to our term (namely: is it a synonym? specialization? One can imagine other relations as well like “generalization”).
>     * The payment scheme in which one would use this term (e.g., credit, debit, digital currency). The data here are not perfect; I don’t
>       know how to characterize a “user account” for something like PayPal. This field could also include additional notes where useful.
> What do you think of this sort of structure for the glossary reference? Are there other data for each term that you think would help the reader (e.g., “Examples” or “See also”)?
> I expect there are respec features to do much of what I did by hand for illustration, such as management of references and an index.
> Ian
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
Rabobank disclaimer: http://www.rabobank.nl/disclaimer
Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2015 12:38:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:33 UTC