RE: Charter: 3.2 Optional Deliverables

Adrian HB: We are doing both. If we have a standard that ignores pull it will take a long time to get traction. If we have a standard that accommodates both it will get traction and the market will move payments onto better schemes (push-based more likely)  because we have solved the problem of migrating payers onto digital wallets. These may just be proxies for card initially but that will change quickly when their use is wide enough to justify the investment in new schemes.

 

+1

 

​​​​​

 

 

* katie *

 

Katie Haritos-Shea 
Senior Accessibility SME (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

 

Cell: 703-371-5545 |  <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA |  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545

 

From: Adrian Hope-Bailie [mailto:adrian@hopebailie.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:49 AM
To: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
Cc: Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Charter: 3.2 Optional Deliverables

 

 

 

On 18 August 2015 at 07:39, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear list,
I have a few questions regarding the topic above.

http://www.w3.org/2015/06/payments-wg-charter.html

Card Payments Recommendation
A very large proportion of payments on the Web are conducted using payment cards from one of the global card schemes.  The group should attempt to define a standardized specialization of the payment flow specifically for payment cards.

[AR] Great!  Are there any known people working on this right now?

 

Not yet, since we don't know what the standard will look like. Hopefully the stakeholders with a vested interest in keeping card payments alive will make this a priority so that cards will still be useful when this standard is implemented.
 


- Demonstrate how a debit-pull digital payment scheme should be implemented using Web Payments APIs.

[AR] Why bother with pull?  Pull is (using current card technology) entirely dependent on centralized payment processors and tokenization providers which IMHO is the "old" way of doing things. I have just finished a prototype of a push-based Web Payment system which will published in September for general evaluation.  It supports several cool things (which current card-based schemes do not) that become close to trivial when you have a digital wallet.

 

You are correct, pull-based systems are hopefully going to disappear over time but assuming that will happen anytime soon is a bit optimistic I think.

 


- Standardize a common approach for payment card schemes globally to kick-start adoption of Web Payments APIs.

[AR] If you rather settle for push you could target a much wider range of Web Payments including popular schemes like the Dutch IDEAL.

 

We are doing both. If we have a standard that ignores pull it will take a long time to get traction. If we have a standard that accommodates both it will get traction and the market will move payments onto better schemes (push-based more likely)  because we have solved the problem of migrating payers onto digital wallets. These may just be proxies for card initially but that will change quickly when their use is wide enough to justify the investment in new schemes.
 


Anders
Sending his weekly update
https://github.com/cyberphone/web2native-bridge/blob/master/webpayment.client/src/org/webpki/w2nb/webpayment/client/Wallet.java