Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add PaymentItem type to deal with transaction types (#111)

I have done an about turn on this after preparing PR #133.

I think we should leave this entirely up to the payment method to define because, as we are discovering, the specifics are important AND should be the domain of the payment app to worry about.

Consider the complex set of recurring payment scenarios that @triblondon has described above. I would imagine that the rules for these are codified by payment schemes that support them. This suggests that there will need to be payment methods that indicate how the data is exchanged to initiate and process these different authorizations. Further, the payment apps that claim support for these payment methods should then be able to interpret the different transaction types for a specific payment method.

The only thing I think we can still standardize at the PaymentRequest level (as opposed to payment method data level) is a mechanism for the merchant to define an obligation (per #113).

I am going to close this in favor of #133 and suggest that the card specific transaction types could be added to the basic card spec.

---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/pull/111#issuecomment-207922183