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

Re: [glossary] External data dictionary reference requirements

From: Swendseid, Claudia <claudia.swendseid@mpls.frb.org>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 13:03:56 +0000
To: "'jpotvin@opman.ca'" <jpotvin@opman.ca>, "'E.R.Fekkes@rn.rabobank.nl'" <E.R.Fekkes@rn.rabobank.nl>, "'public-webpayments@w3.org'" <public-webpayments@w3.org>, "'public-webpayments-ig@w3.org'" <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <129BE05E5F9F41408371CE472FB8456FA70C5B95@NR3PWPGLCD2N.rb.win.frb.org>
One example of a standards development body that W3C has a formal relationship with is ISO TC68 and ASC X9 given the WPIG's interest in ISO 12812 and 8583 as well as various security standards. Claudia



Claudia Swendseid

From: Joseph Potvin [mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 06:55 AM
To: E.R.Fekkes@rn.rabobank.nl <E.R.Fekkes@rn.rabobank.nl>; Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>; Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [glossary] External data dictionary reference requirements

RE: Are there specific standards bodies FORMALLY recognized by the W3C?

Hmm, in fact I was hoping there were but I don't know.

In domains like payments and e-commerce, any Venn diagram of the relevant deep-rooted standards bodies will look like the overlapping circles of the Olympic logo. So formal liaisons seem to me indispensible to facilitate dedicated efforts to map the structure, semantics & syntax.  Ideally the sort of formal recognition I had in mind for this IG would be like these examples:
W3C & OASIS http://www.w3.org/Submission/2006/01/w3c-oasis-cgm-final-051215.pdf

W3C & OMA http://www.w3.org/2004/05/W3C-OMA-Agreement-FINAL.html

W3C & VoiceXML Forum http://www.w3.org/2001/10/MOU.txt


Here also are some non-W3C examples:
* IEC, ISO, ITU & UN/ECE
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/ebusiness/Pages/mou/MoUMG-members.aspx

* ISO & IEC
http://www.iso.org/iso/jtc1_home.html

* IETF & ITU
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6756

* IETF & IEEE 802
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-rfc4441rev-08



RE: I am not sure if it is right to label this as the PRIMARY default external source.

This IG has correctly identified ISO 20022 as the primary default external standard for the exchange of financial information. In a nutshell, my recommendation is for this W3C initiative to equivalently reference both ISO 20022 and ISO 19845 (i.e. UBL  http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=66370  due for final vote next month).

SWIFT brought uniformity to the financial info for 20022, but things aren't quite as elegant in the realm of e-commerce standards. Rather than a nice orderly Olympic logo sort of Venn Diagram, it's more like scribbled circles, with the result that there's been considerable confusion about which standards bodies cover what aspects. Here's a (2011) effort by OASIS/UBL Co-Chair Ken Holman to situate these various circles:
http://eeiplatform.com/4701/why-consider-cii-or-sepa-with-the-advent-of-ubl-2-1/

Original source: http://ubl.xml.org/book/export/html/234

Things have advanced in the subsequent 4 years, and based on what I see, I recommend that UBL be given the same status as 20022 in this IG's work, acknowledging that there are likely a few aspects where they overlap an must be reconciled.

This also means that anything which shows up in this W3C IG/GC work as "in scope", and which is already addressed in those other standards (ditto for others that I've not mentioned here), should be pointed at, not re-created or re-stated.

Joseph Potvin
Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
jpotvin@opman.ca<mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca>
Mobile: 819-593-5983<tel:819-593-5983>




On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:27 AM, <E.R.Fekkes@rn.rabobank.nl<mailto:E.R.Fekkes@rn.rabobank.nl>> wrote:
Joseph,

Thanks for the input on the Glossary page.

I have two questions:

1.  “existing standards bodies recognized by the W3C”
Are there specific standards bodies FORMALLY recognized by the W3C?

If so, could you point me to a reference to such a  list?
(and I will then go look into that to see whether the standards from payments such as EMV and PCI are listed there)
If not, I would suggest to strike the wording "formally recognized by the W3C"

2. The reference to UBL is giving a strong link to the work done on Universal Business Language.
However, I am not sure if it is right to label this as the PRIMARY default external source.
Within the Glossary, no specific preference or precedence has been given to the different sources.

Regards,

Evert

Van: Joseph Potvin [mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca<mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca>]
Verzonden: woensdag 20 mei 2015 22:50
Aan: Web Payments CG; Web Payments IG
Onderwerp: [glossary] External data dictionary reference requirements

CURRENT TEXT:
"The aim of this page is to gather Glossary Terms from the Use Cases and Payment Agent and provide a wiki page platform to facilitate consideration of the definitions by the IG. When available, references to external definitions will be listed with the terms."
PROPOSED:
The aim of this page is to gather Glossary Terms from the Use Cases and Payment Agent and provide a wiki page platform to facilitate consideration of the definitions by the IG. Definitions of terms that are inherent to Web specifications will be drawn from existing W3C data dictionaries, with appropriate references. Definitions of terms that are inherent to the domains of e-commerce and payments will be drawn from the data dictionaries of other existing standards bodies recognized by the W3C, with appropriate references. The primary default external source shall be the most recent International Data Dictionary of ISO/IEC 19845 (Universal Business Language Version 2.1)
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/idd/cs-UBL-2.0-idd01/cs-UBL-2.0-idd01.zip


--
Joseph Potvin
Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
jpotvin@opman.ca<mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca>
Mobile: 819-593-5983<tel:819-593-5983>
======================================================
Rabobank disclaimer: http://www.rabobank.nl/disclaimer



--



This e-mail message, including attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential or proprietary information.  If you are not the intended recipient, immediately contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Received on Friday, 22 May 2015 13:04:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:36 UTC