W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments-ig@w3.org > March 2015

RE: [use_cases] Some edits today

From: David Ezell <David_E3@VERIFONE.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 22:34:11 +0000
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <54C00E24834FCE47B11EC129A84E7F78CCB26333@VF2WDEXMB1.verifone.com>
Hi Ian and Manu:
I haven't had a chance to review the text in detail.  But here's a high-level comment.

1) Refunds are given customers in the normal course of business, and constitute a business transaction.
2) Reversals are a messaging detail (maybe important to us) to help assure the transaction has the property of being idempotent - no double billing.  Reversing a transaction that doesn't exist or has already been reversed has no effect.

Those are how I'm familiar with the terms.

I thought we discussed these definitions before, but I could be wrong - could be some other group of people at some other time.

Best regards,
David

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org]
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 6:26 PM
To: Manu Sporny
Cc: Web Payments IG
Subject: [use_cases] Some edits today

Hi Manu,

After discussion with you I made the following edits to the Use Cases doc and propagated them to the site:

 * Section 6 now titled “Use cases”
 * Given the presence of a “Refunds” use case, I have augmented Phase 4 to include “Reversals.”  This led to a number
    of changes:

    - Removal of text in 3 that said “We are not going to include refunds as a use case"
    - Addition of Reversals to 3.4. Please review the text I added.
    - Addition of Reversals in other titles in the document that previously just said "Delivery of Product/Receipt” (4.4., 6.4, 7.2, 7.5)
    - Created new section 6.4.3 for Reversals with the Refunds use case. Added an issue about whether to include a scenario
      where the payment scheme of the refund is different than that of the original payment.

Also, I noticed that we should review how the terms payment, transaction, and purchase are used in the document. Are we using them consistently? Do we need to define “Payment” in the glossary?

Thanks!

Ian


[1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webpayments/raw-file/default/latest/use-cases/index.html

--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs

Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447




________________________________
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 Monday, 30 March 2015 22:36:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:33 UTC