Re: Multiple Wallets

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 9:14 AM, David Jackson <david.dj.jackson@oracle.com>
wrote:

> David has a point here. We are becoming confused in our usage of wallet
> versus instrument. While it is true that the industry is in part to blame
> for creating this confusion. As an example, "pay with Google Wallet" should
> not make sense. It should be "pay with <payment instrument>" which the user
> "stores" in the Google Wallet. In theory, the user should select which
> instrument of the accepted ones from the wallet in which it is contained.
> I'm not certain the standard should "select" a wallet -- the user needs to
> control that to present a selected payment method from wherever it is
> stored. I agree with David's point which makes it interesting in the
> Charter to declare the beginning of the process -- is it discovery of all
> wallets and payment methods therein? Or is that left to user choice to
> "present" payment ...
>
> I agree with David Singer, but I think you're confused. Google Wallet is
not a "wallet" as defined by the spec. Google Wallet is a payment
instrument. The merchant accepts Google Wallet and magically gets paid by
Google. The transactions might be backed by a bank transfer, a balance in
the user's account, a debit card, or a credit card. This is opaque to the
merchant.

(*) There might be some legal restrictions based on what types of
instruments can be used for which types of transactions. I'm not really
sure since I don't work in this area. But according to David Singer's
email, this would need to be expressed as options on the Google Wallet
payment instrument.

Brett