Proposed FAQ Entry [Was: Relation of proposed Web Payments WG to Secure Electronic Transaction (SET)?]

Hi all,

Thank you for the responses to my question. Here's a draft FAQ
answer. You'll note that I only mention what I read as _functional_
differences between the SET approach and the scope of the new
WG. Other observations and people's experiences with SET (e.g., "more
complex" or "operated in a restricted processing environment" or
"there was no mobile") seem not directly relevant to the FAQ. They
are good comments to bear in mind as we set about working, but
I don't think this FAQ entry needs to "critique” SET, just say “why
is this different”.

Comments welcome!

Ian

====

Q. What is the relation of this work to Secure Electronic Transaction
     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Electronic_Transaction

A. SET also attempted to address some of the issues that the Web
Payments Interest Group considers important. However:

* SET was only concerned with securing credit card transactions. This Working Group looks to ease integration of other payment schemes as well.
* SET depended on client certificates issued to card holders by their banks.
* SET was developed prior to common acceptance of ssl (and thus included functionality that is not directly addressed by this Working Group).
* SET rendered customer data opaque to the merchant.

--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447