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

Re: A vision statement for the Internet of Value/Value Web

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Mon, 04 May 2015 23:35:43 -0400
Message-ID: <55483A8F.5000007@digitalbazaar.com>
To: public-webpayments-ig@w3.org
On 05/03/2015 03:54 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie wrote:
> As discussed on a few previous calls I'd like to propose the
> following document as a high-level vision statement for the W3C Web
> Payments initiative.
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B7WGoj-5M9X_S0-XZYTw6BWi9WytMXta44lhtqZvRjM/edit

Thanks for putting time into this Adrian, it's very helpful. :)

We should be more aggressive with the vision.

We are building value exchange into the Web. It is being designed so
that it is broadly and directly accessible by humankind. This means that
we are putting people and the organizations they want to transact with
first. We are designing the system in the open, at the W3C, with
constant public feedback.

It will support existing systems, and it will enable the safe and rapid
deployment of new value exchange systems via the Web.


More details...

Overall, I think the document has immediate value in that it places
importance on things like "open standards", "security", "simplicity and
extensibility", and other stuff that the group most likely accepts by
default (otherwise we wouldn't be doing this at the W3C). I don't think
it says it powerfully, though.

There's a bit of "motherhood and apple pie" to the document. It's not
controversial and so it raises the question on whether or not it would
be compelling to readers.

The argument against that, though, is that we don't really say what we
stand for - so this document is far better than what we have right now,
which is "not much".

The rest of my input are nitpicks on the "Value Web" and "Internet of
Value" moniker. I'm not a fan, but have not been able to come up with
much that's better in my brief read of the document tonight.

> 1. Unify the group and any other stakeholders around a shared vision 
> for how value exchange on the Web should work.


> 2. Provide a "rallying call" and descriptive and easy to express
> name for the work we are doing: The Value Web and Internet of Value 
> (which can be used interchangeably).

+1 for "we need a rallying call". -1 in that I don't think the document
is powerful enough to rally folks (yet), and the "Value Web" and
"Internet of Value" monikers need some Marketing work.

> 3. Provide the foundations for a marketing campaign around the
> vision of the group in an effort to garner support and recruit
> additional participants.

Isn't this what the Executive Summaries are supposed to do? I agree that
Vision is important too... but we should understand what the recruitment
funnel looks like for the group.

My expectation was that it was:

1. Market-specific Executive Summary
2. Vision
3. Call to Action via recruiting touch point
4. W3C Bizdev

> I would like to propose it as a group Note in the coming weeks.

A review at the face-to-face and then publication as a group note after
the face-to-face would be a workable timeline. I don't think we'll get
enough review/edits done before then to put something out as a Note.

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2015 03:36:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:35 UTC