W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments-ig@w3.org > February 2017

Re: Types of Digital Receipts

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 21:30:48 -0500
To: Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca>, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>, David Ezell <David_E3@verifone.com>
Cc: Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <58A11A58.3070304@digitalbazaar.com>
On 02/12/2017 01:15 PM, Joseph Potvin wrote:
> Is there a reason to not make use of the UBL ontology? 
> https://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/os-UBL-2.1/UBL-2.1.html (Also now 
> available in JSON. 
> <https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/201701/msg00020.html>)


Some high level thoughts:

* Yes, /some/ part of UBL might be useful (but it's huge!)
* Ferreting out the overlap between GS1, UBL, ARTS, is going to be
  difficult and challenging.
* The UBL JSON mapping doesn't seem like it's standards track (it says
  so on the side of that document)
* It's not clear who has implemented the JSON stuff, or UBL? How wide
  are the deployments?

BTW, Joseph, did you see my email to the Credentials CG / VCTF wrt.
UNCITRAL? Looks like we're aligned w/ their most recent findings wrt.
Identity Management.

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Rebalancing How the Web is Built
Received on Monday, 13 February 2017 02:31:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:57 UTC