RE: FW: [use cases] Review of use case 3.3 "Choosing a Payment Instrument"

Continuing remarks:

*****************
> *Main Section*
>
> + Adding a line on discovery before the first sentence: "The payee
> can discover the locally installed user payment agents and their
> payment instruments (and supported schemes)."

+0.5

It's not the payee that discovers the payment agents (it's the software that is triggered during the payment initiation process), and the payment agents don't have to be "locally installed" (rather, they have to be registered locally, a web wallet may not be considered to be "locally installed").

I tried to apply the intent of what you're saying above here, let me know if it doesn't work for you:

https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-ig/commit/851c7b38313032a91add01a2b0ed072ac7e4b4f1#diff-69ba5032c87a9348b1e27b6faf8217abR492

> + Add a line before "Optionally,...": "The payee then sends the
> payment request to the selected user payment agent."

+0.6

[Laurent] I 100% agree on registered vs installed, it's far more flexible.
I don't fully get who you mean by 'payment initiation process'. I was envisioning a solution where the user agent (i.e. the browser) would offer a W3C compliant API to discover registered payment agent, letting the merchant website do an additional filtering / presentation.
How we send the payment request to each agents is also going to be an interesting question: HTTP request, chrome native messaging, web2native, User Agent API, ... There are many solutions (and might be out of scope actually, if we only define data formats).

****************
> s/ Each merchant provides a list of acceptable payment *instruments*./
> Each merchant provides a list of acceptable payment *schemes*./

+0.5 - remember that payment instruments may be limited inside a
particular payment scheme (such as a merchant only accepting Visa / Mastercard, and not accepting American Express). I tried to apply the gist of what you wanted here:

https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-ig/commit/851c7b38313032a91add01a2b0ed072ac7e4b4f1#diff-69ba5032c87a9348b1e27b6faf8217abL461

[Laurent] Hum, I'm getting the impression you're thinking "card scheme" as a whole. Usually Visa / MC / AMEX are distinct schemes; it's not "card scheme" vs "bitcoin scheme", it's more "visa scheme", "amex scheme", "bitcoin scheme", ...
In that context, the sentence "...payment schemes, and if applicable,
specific payment instruments within each scheme (such as Visa and MasterCard only)", does not make sense: visa, mc are not payment instruments, they are payment schemes.

Laurent
________________________________
 This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender.
Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a transmitted virus.

This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender.
Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a transmitted virus

Received on Thursday, 19 February 2015 14:57:15 UTC