- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 20:47:26 -0400
- To: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- Cc: Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>
On 03/15/2017 02:25 PM, Jeff Jaffe wrote: > I like the conceptual model and the thinking in this presentation. > Thank you. > > Less clear is what to do about it! Yes, that's partly because this deck started as a discussion that attempted to tie together the work around Web Payments, Digital Offers, and Verifiable Claims and slowly morphed into something that's focused on Digital Offers. I think that's diluted the message a bit in some areas and strengthened it in others. The presentation is now more about Digital Offers than anything else, so the focus will mostly be on moving the digital offers work forward. As for "what to do about it", that's an evolving conversation, so here's where we are so far in the thinking... > I assume that the main missing capability is what you describe on > Slide 12. But what is the status of this thinking? Slide 12 lists the missing capabilities for ONLY the demoed use case. There are around 10-15 more use cases currently under consideration in the Digital Offers group and each may have one or more additional missing capabilities. Slides 22 and 25 hint at additional missing capabilities (red arrows). The rest of the answers to your questions are just Digital Bazaar's responses. I expect others in the IG to have differing opinions. > * Are you proposing to create a use case document; e.g. in a CG? I expect the Digital Offers CG will continue to refine their use cases document. I also expect that group to produce an architecture document w/ gap analysis of some kind for digital offers that will tie together existing parts of the Web Platform and identify additional capabilities required by the platform. > * Are there first draft specs of these capabilities that are > incubated somewhere? Here are the specs that our organization sees as necessary, mapped to existing or proposed future W3C specs/WGs (with required capabilities in parenthesis and *NEW* beside new proposed work): Existing W3C specs that are useful: * Linked Data Notifications (loyalty card messaging) * Web Platform Display Capabilities (rendering of loyalty cards) * HTML5/CSS3 W3C Draft specs that will be useful: * Web Push API (loyalty card messaging) * PaymentRequest API (payments related to loyalty) * Payment Handler API (digital wallet) * Web Platform Display Capabilities (rendering of loyalty cards) * Shadow DOM * Custom Elements * HTML Imports Verifiable Claims WG: * Verifiable Claims Data Model (verifiable loyalty cards, coupons) *NEW* Verifiable Claims Protocol WG (maybe after VCWG v1.0): * Verifiable Claims Protocol WG (sharing loyalty cards, coupons), OR * Credential Management API (sharing loyalty cards, coupons, etc.) *NEW* Digital Offers WG (possible future group) * Digital Offers Data Model (expression of loyalty cards, coupons) * Digital Offers Rendering Model (display of loyalty cards, coupons) > * Are there implementations that are being incubated? Open Source? Yes, you'll see one implementation of this ecosystem at the WPIG meeting. The demo we'll be doing is an implementation of the Verifiable Claims Data Model and Verifiable Claims Protocol as applied to Digital Offers. > * Are you saying this work is mature enough for a Working Group? Yes and no. The Verifiable Claims bits are mature enough for a WG. The protocol bits and rendering of loyalty card bits are not and will need to be incubated further. > * Is there a community of people who are interested in addressing > Slide 12 at W3C? At present, that community is the Digital Offers CG and we're presently building it out. We hope to get new W3C members into that group from the retail sector. There are other use cases related to Digital Offers and for those use cases: We're working on the payments aspects in the Web Payments WG. There are certainly people that are interested in market vertical applications of Slide 12 in the Verifiable Claims group in healthcare, retail, government, and education. Apologies for the complicated answer, as much of what we do depends on WPIG member consensus. There are many ways that this could play out, and while it can be clear in one's mind what path should be taken, the herd of cats at W3C often end up somewhere else worthwhile. :) -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Rebalancing How the Web is Built http://manu.sporny.org/2016/rebalancing/
Received on Monday, 20 March 2017 00:47:59 UTC