[Use Cases] Terms/Concepts categorizations at the f2f - was {RE: Thanks to all and next steps}}

[Note:  I am moving the subject of response to this thread to one more descriptive than "Thanks to all and Next Steps."  The last email[1] in this thread is noted below.]

Hi Folks:
I have moved this thread to [Use Cases] because I believe that will be the first place we deal with this part of our face to face discussions.

On 2015-06-22 @ 9:49AM ET Joseph Potvin wrote:
>[Payer/Payee >> Invoice] sequence. This work should take-as-given any e-invoice documents and components
>established and maintained by the authoritative e-Commerce semantic and technical specifications.

On 2015-06-22 @ 9:48AM ET Joseph Potvin wrote:
>W3C has a mandate to specify essential commonalities in how all browsers should handle any [Payer/Payee >> Invoice]
>sequence...

As far as "invoice," many of us were not comfortable with the specific V1 exclusion.  The concept does remain.  As one of those who was not comfortable, I AM comfortable with the current understanding of how we'll address the concept in V1.

On 2015-06-22 @ 10:05AM ET David Jackson wrote:
>V1 = we are NOT seeking to include a standard for invoice nor contents related to such. We COULD offer an optional call
>to include an invoice of a format used by both payee and payer should that be of interest in the implementation (highly
>likely to loyalty processing). However, we WOULD like to include a <signal of some kind> that the payment has been sent
>for processing as feedback to the payer/customer.

+1

On 2015-06-23 @ 2:33PM ET Adrian Hope-Bailie wrote:
>My interpretation of the consensus at the F2F was that we will leave all of this contentious stuff to the payment scheme
>to define and will, in v1, simply define a high level flow and a message format that can be used as a container for scheme
>specific messaging.

>From reading the email and minutes, it might be hard to understand that this stuff was contentious.  Please accept that it was, and that the IG decision are to focus on some subjects for the time being.  No topics were declared out of scope for the IG permanently.  Please, no worries there.

Best regards,
David

[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2015Jun/0129.html
________________________________
This electronic message, including attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or company named above or to which it is addressed. The information contained in this message shall be considered confidential and proprietary, and may include confidential work product. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and deleting this email immediately.

Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2015 16:09:36 UTC