- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 14:29:09 -0500
- To: Nick Shearer <nshearer@apple.com>
- Cc: Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca>, Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <E7319770-2E91-49CF-93F6-A192F5459BC5@w3.org>
> On Jun 26, 2015, at 2:16 PM, Nick Shearer <nshearer@apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Jun 26, 2015, at 11:55 AM, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote: >> >> Nick, Might we agree on the following statement? "ISO 20022 standardizes only a message 'scheme' without specifying the various message types, because messages are transitory and they evolve with the diversity of payment systems in operation. For convenience the ISO 20022 community maintains a catalogue of message types structured according to the ISO 20022 standard. However that catalogue is not intrinsic to the standard." >> >> Are you recommending that the IG's work should not even accept any dependence upon the financial industry's messaging scheme (or compatible)? > > First of all, thanks to Ian for the clarifying e-mail. > > Just so you can better understand my position - it rather depends what you mean by “dependence”. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suppose that in the future there may be radically different payment instruments and schemes than what we have today. Such schemes should not necessarily be encumbered or dependent on an existing ISO standard, and so neither should the standard. But that is not to say ISO 20022 could not form part of any web payments standard - just it should not be a mandatory part. I would like to propose concretely, then, in the dependencies and liaisons section of the charter something like this: ISO Technical Committee TC68 Financial Services. This TC published ISO 20022 which (according to the group’s FAQ [1]) "defines the ISO platform for the development of financial message standards.” Because of broad adoption [2] of ISO 20022 for some applications [3], the Working Group should discuss with the TC in what ways alignment with ISO 20022 would achieve interoperability with the Web. Do people think that would be an improvement to the draft charter? Ian [1] http://www.iso20022.org/faq.page [2] http://www.iso20022.org/documents/adoption/ISO20022_adoption_report.pdf [3] http://www.iso20022.org/faq.page#scope -- Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 718 260 9447
Received on Friday, 26 June 2015 19:29:10 UTC