- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:05:06 -0500
- To: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
- Cc: Cynthia Baxter <cynthia.baxter@mpls.frb.org>, "Swendseid, Claudia" <claudia.swendseid@mpls.frb.org>, Arie Y LEVY COHEN <arielevycohen@gmail.com>, "Srikanth.Garnepudi" <Srikanth.Garnepudi@target.com>, Zach Koch <zkoch@google.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <7007BD03-7E49-42B9-B287-3F4AB855A877@w3.org>
> On Jul 2, 2015, at 11:50 AM, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote: > > Thanks, Adrian! > > I have moved your content to a wiki: > https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/ArchitectureWGMessages > > I welcome people to start editing and adding content. I’ll return to this soon! Hello all, Just a reminder that we will meet in one hour to discuss comms around the Payments WG. Let’s meet on #wpay using WebEx https://mit.webex.com/meet/ijacobs Ian > > Ian > > >> On Jul 1, 2015, at 6:04 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Ian, >> >> I'll be in San Francisco that week and not sure what my agenda looks like yet but will try to keep this slot open. >> >> Can we start to discuss some of these points via email ahead of time to get the ball rolling? >> Some thoughts off the top of my head: >> >> * the problem that the charter addresses >> >> Making payments on the Web is a terrible user experience. >> Most payments are based around the use of cards and require users to capture card details directly onto the Web which is insecure. >> Trying to introduce new payment schemes is hard because it complicates the payment process. (Manual selection of payment method + the Nascar problem) >> >> * what will be different with the standards in place and how different audiences will benefit. >> >> Users (More control, more options better user experience: >> >> - Ability to load a variety of payment instruments into a wallet (of their choice) >> - Payment flow is simpler, standardised and many steps are (or can be) automated >> - Have control over how much automation (better user experience) vs control they want through >> - Competitive environment for wallet providers will mean greater innovation and better wallets >> >> Merchants and other payees (More choice for users, lower cart abandonment, lower fees, new bus through micropayments) >> >> - Can offer large numbers of payment options without jeopardising the user's payment experience >> - Reduced cart abandonment !!!!! >> - More secure payment methods (such as tokenised card payments ala Apple Pay) which were impractical without a standard wallet interface will be more accessible and should have lower processing fees >> - The opportunity to easily introduce new payment schemes to the market and automate large aspects of the payment process will likely lead to a workable micro-payments system. This, combined with the possibility of very low fee schemes, will open up entirely new business opportunities that are now viable >> >> Payment Service Providers (More innovation, more agility, more options) >> >> - Fewer hurdles to innovate around new/improved payment schemes and instruments. If the scheme follows the standard then it can be easily adopted by wallets and payment processors, no need to establish myriad bilateral agreements to get adoption >> - Improvements to payment schemes can be rolled out without disrupting the market (potentially without user's and merchants even knowing the scheme has been updated) >> - Payment gateways that provide payment processing for merchants can seamlessly roll new schemes out which will automatically start being used by customers that have payment instruments for that scheme. The merchant may not even know it has happened (same applies for "market-like" services like Etsy, Shopify, eBay etc) >> >> Banks (Push payments, improved customer offering) >> >> - Banks can now offer their customers a wallet (or just a scheme) that supports push payments direct from their customer's bank account. (See iDeal in the Netherlands as a standardized domestic example: https://www.ideal.nl/en/) >> - Banks can now realistically offer a compelling wallet to their customers that is useful across the Web not just in cases where the bank has bilateral agreements >> >> Mobile operators (A 2nd chance to be part of the payment ecosystem as wallet provider and/or payment scheme administrator) >> >> - MNOs had a chance to be part of the payments ecosystem by offering their SIMs as the secure area for mobile payments but they could never agree with the banks on who would own the customer. Then HCE came along and cut them out. With this standard in place they have an opportunity to compete with the banks and PSPs as both wallet providers and/or providers of a payment scheme that leverages their unique position in the value chain. >> >> * why this is different from previous work (one answer may be “there are native protocols but not open standards for this”) >> >> - What previous work :) >> - Previous efforts from browsers have been isolated and not been standardised across browsers. >> - We have buy in from the right stakeholders for this to be a success >> - We are doing this with a long term view so that it can evolve to a full Web Payments scheme. >> >> Adrian >> >> >> On 30 June 2015 at 22:01, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> On Jun 30, 2015, at 2:55 PM, Baxter, Cynthia <cynthia.baxter@mpls.frb.org> wrote: >>> >>> Claudia can meet 7/3 at 10 ET (9 CT) but has a meeting at the proposed 11 ET that we prefer not to move. >> >> What about 7/17 at noon ET? >> >> Ian >> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Ian Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org] >>> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 2:19 PM >>> To: Swendseid, Claudia; Arie Y LEVY COHEN; Srikanth.Garnepudi; Zach Koch; Manu Sporny >>> Cc: Web Payments IG >>> Subject: Proposal to chat about Payments Architecture WG communications - 11am ET on 3 June >>> >>> Claudia, Arie, Srikanth, Zach, Manu, >>> >>> I took and action (112) to lead discussion with you about communications around the upcoming Web Payments Architecture Working Group. >>> (Other participants in the Interest Group are also welcome to participate in the discussion.) >>> >>> I propose to start by developing the story that explains: >>> >>> * the problem that the charter addresses >>> * what will be different with the standards in place and how different audiences will benefit. I have in mind: users, merchants, payment service >>> providers, banks, mobile operators; we can discuss this list of course. >>> * why this is different from previous work (one answer may be “there are native protocols but not open standards for this”) >>> >>> I think developing this story will help us in a variety of ways, including: >>> >>> * Member review of the charter >>> * Launch communications in September >>> >>> I propose to meet Friday, 3 June, at 11am ET to start discussion. If that doesn’t work then I will find another time in July. >>> >>> Please let me know if you can attend a call. Thank you, >>> >>> Ian >>> >>> -- >>> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs >>> Tel: +1 718 260 9447 >>> >>> >>> This e-mail message, including attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, immediately contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. >> >> -- >> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs >> Tel: +1 718 260 9447 >> >> >> >> > > -- > Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs > Tel: +1 718 260 9447 > > > -- Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 718 260 9447
Received on Friday, 17 July 2015 15:05:14 UTC