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

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

From: <Joerg.Heuer@telekom.de>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 09:51:11 +0200
To: <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FB5E170315856249A4C381355C027E45029033F052EF@HE100041.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
Hi all,

Although I had a read through the document early this week, I wasn't able to keep up with the mails. Sorry if I might not meet the topic too well.

To me, the Internet of Value concept appears to  about the creation of a notion of valuable data sets in the Web. Something which complements the work on permissions - or entitlements - to grant access to valuable data and services on the web. Sounds like we have complementing 'by value' and 'by reference' concepts, like in most imperative programming languages.

Do we really need to do anything about that but accept and include it?

Cheers,
	Jörg

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org] 
Sent: Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2015 22:24
To: Adrian Hope-Bailie
Cc: Telford-Reed, Nick; Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL; Manu Sporny; Web Payments IG
Subject: Re: A vision statement for the Internet of Value/Value Web


> On May 6, 2015, at 3:12 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Nick, Ian,
> 
> I think it would be a great pity to not publish something at or just prior to the F2F that we can generate some publicity around. This event is where we plan on defining our specific goals and the work we want to do so having as many stakeholders as possible in attendance seems like our most crucial task until then.
> 
> How do we attract these stakeholders if we only plan to review our vision, goals and executive summaries at the event itself? It feels a bit like designing the party invitation at the party.
> 
> I can understand putting off the design of specific measurable goals until then, as the formulation of these could generate some good debate and then face to face conversations are valuable. This vision statement is intentionally high-level and sufficiently short that we should easily be able to collaborate on it via email or phone calls during the 6 weeks we still have available before the F2F.
> 
> I'd like to discuss this on Monday's call please and understand the objections if any to having this published sooner so that they can be addressed.

I am still behind on my reading, including the most recent draft of the Manifesto. I think it’s a compelling idea for raising awareness.


However,  I know there is going to be a lot of work preparing for the meeting and so finalizing a work product before the meeting seems ambitious to me. I also think that while the Manifesto might create some awareness, a rich agenda and the opportunity to set the direction of standards work is probably a more compelling reason for people to attend a 3-day meeting.

+1 to discussion on Monday and thanks for thinking about how to move 
+things forward,

Ian

> 
> Adrian
> 
> On 6 May 2015 at 14:26, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> > On May 6, 2015, at 7:24 AM, Telford-Reed, Nick <Nick.Telford-Reed@worldpay.com> wrote:
> >
> > Given the increased engagement and focus that participants can apply during the F2F I would really like to see this on the agenda for that meeting rather than releasing as a note ahead of time.
> 
> My understanding is that we are reviewing this material as input to the FTF meeting, and we’ll have a discussion at the FTF meeting, and any publication decision will result from the FTF discussion.
> 
> Ian
> 
> >
> > Nick
> >
> > --
> > Nick Telford-Reed
> > e: nick.telford-reed@worldpay.com | m: +447799473854 | t: +44 203 
> > 664 5069
> >
> > From: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 05 May 2015 22:09
> > To: 'Adrian Hope-Bailie'; 'Manu Sporny'
> > Cc: 'Web Payments IG'
> > Subject: RE: A vision statement for the Internet of Value/Value Web
> >
> > I really like #4…nicely and succinctly stated…..;-) “4. The Value 
> > Web is open and accessible.
> > It is a long-standing W3C principal to create a Web that can be used by all people on any device. Nobody is arbitrarily denied access to the Internet of Value.”
> >
> >
> >
> > * katie *
> >
> > Katie Haritos-Shea
> > Senior Accessibility SME (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)
> >
> > Cell: 703-371-5545 | ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA | LinkedIn 
> > Profile | Office: 703-371-5545
> >
> > From: Adrian Hope-Bailie [mailto:adrian@hopebailie.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 4:59 PM
> > To: Manu Sporny
> > Cc: Web Payments IG
> > Subject: Re: A vision statement for the Internet of Value/Value Web
> >
> > Hi Manu,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback. I have incorporated almost all of your suggested changes and think it is "stronger" for it. Do you feel it still needs more controversy? It's hard to be intentionally controversial if the vision we have is unlikely to offend anyone and is generally accepted as being in the best interests of all stakeholders.
> >
> > I have also made reference to accessibility and financial inclusion. These are important but I don't want to give the impression that our primary goal is financial inclusion. It is a highly desired side-effect of what we are doing. i.e. We are not the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
> >
> > There are two sticking points we'll need to get consensus on.
> >
> > 1. "Should" vs "Is"
> > I have had conflicting feedback on whether the principals should be worded "The Value Web should..." vs "The Value Web is...". I don't feel strongly either way but rather than have comments against each principal from various perspectives let's get consensus on this broadly.
> >
> > 2. The "Value Web"/"Internet of Value" Moniker I feel strongly that 
> > we should have a "catchy" moniker attached to this activity for a number of reasons.
> > i. It appeals to a wide audience to have a title to your vision that can be related through analogy to an existing concept. Hence the "Internet of Value" moniker which obviously has parallels with the Internet of Things.
> > ii. "Catchiness" is not to be under-rated as a marketing tool and a hook/anchor for our marketing, publicity and recruitment efforts. It will be a lot easier to tag all our Tweets with #ValueWeb than #ValueExchangeOnTheWeb .
> > iii. There is a certain amount of currency to be earned in coining a phrase like these, publicizing them and being recognized as the founders/pioneers of the movement. For the W3C Web Payments activity to be recgnised as such is immeasurably valuable to our credibility.
> >
> > Ito a roadmap from here I think that not having this ready for publication at or before the F2F is selling ourselves short. The meeting in June is an ideal opportunity (in NYC to boot) to make a song and dance about what we are trying to achieve by announcing the FPWD of our vision statement. The document is in a pretty good state already thanks to the contributions I have had from yourself and Ian and the comments I have already incorporated. If there are any further changes you think are required please let me know.
> >
> >
> > On 5 May 2015 at 05:35, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> > 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-XZYTw6BWi9WytMX

> > > ta44lhtqZvRjM/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.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > > 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 
> > http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/

> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This e-mail and any attachments are confidential, intended only for the addressee and may be privileged. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it. Any content that does not relate to the business of Worldpay is personal to the sender and not authorised or endorsed by Worldpay. Worldpay does not accept responsibility for viruses or any loss or damage arising from transmission or access.
> >
> > Worldpay (UK) Limited (Company No: 07316500/ Financial Conduct 
> > Authority No: 530923), Worldpay Limited (Company No:03424752 / 
> > Financial Conduct Authority No: 504504), Worldpay AP Limited (Company No: 05593466 / Financial Conduct Authority No: 502597). Registered Office: The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AF and authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority under the Payment Service Regulations 2009 for the provision of payment services. Worldpay (UK) Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority for consumer credit activities. Worldpay B.V. (WPBV) has its registered office in Amsterdam, the Netherlands (Handelsregister KvK no. 60494344). WPBV holds a licence from and is included in the register kept by De Nederlandsche Bank, which registration can be consulted through www.dnb.nl . Worldpay, the logo and any associated brand names are trade marks of the Worldpay group.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs

> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
> 
> 
> 
> 

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

Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447




Received on Thursday, 7 May 2015 07:51:53 UTC

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