RE: Payment Initiation - platform integration

Is “invoice” synonymous with “authorization request” or is it something different?

Matt Howarter Director - Payment Services
Phone: 479.204.9922 Fax: 479.277.9796
Matthew.Howarter@wal-mart.com <mailto:Matthew.Howarter@wal-mart.com>
Walmart
702 SW 8th St.
Bentonville, AR 72716-0100
Saving people money so they can live better.

From: Joseph Potvin [mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 5:41 AM
To: Web Payments IG; Web Payments CG
Subject: Re: Payment Initiation - platform integration

Is there agreement that:

1. Payment is always specified and initiated from an invoice?

2. UBL 2.1 provides the relevant global standard for an invoice?  http://ubl.xml.org/ <http://ubl.xml.org/>

Joseph Potvin
Project Coordinator, DataKinetics
Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
jpotvin@opman.ca <mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca>
Mobile: 819-593-5983
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joseph-potvin/2/148/423>

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com <mailto:adrian@hopebailie.com>> wrote:
Looking at the draft spec from Digital Bazaar for the CG and considering both, our language in the charter, and also some of the comments from the charter AC review I wondered what precedent there may be in defining how a browser should process an API call that requires interaction with the platform (host OS).

The best example I could find is in the Web Notifications PR published earlier this month: http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/PR-notifications-20150910/#displaying-notifications <http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/PR-notifications-20150910/#displaying-notifications>
I would like to get the groups' (both IG and CG) views on the parallels here between the action "Displaying Notifications" from the Web Notifications recommendation and a potential "Initiating Payments" section we'd put in a recommendation from our WG.

The pertinent line from the Web Notifications rec is:
"Display notification on the device (e.g. by making the appropriate notification platform API call)." - emphasis mine.

While I know not all platforms upon which browser's run today have mature "payment APIs" in the same way that they have relativley mature "notifications APIs" this open-ended approach seems appealing in that it avoids the browser needing to become complex payment processing applications.

Rather, the messages passed to the navigator.payments API in the browser should simply be passed directly to the platform's payment API (following any security or privacy scrutiny or permissions checks we define).

The timing seems right for us to work with the platform vendors (many of whom are also browser vendors that have expressed interest in working on this problem) to define a common vocabulary and logical messages for this flow.

Example:

On a mobile platform I see this working similarly to the way Android intents may function. The browser passes the payment initiatiation request to the platform and the user is prompted with the app selection dialogue they are accustomed to for selecting the app they want to use for that action (the same way you select which app to use when sharing a photo for example).

Thoughts?

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error destroy it immediately. *** Walmart Confidential ***