@adrianhopebailie, > this feels like something that should be described in the HTTP API? The use case should be supported by it, yes. We intend to be clear in how it's supported as that spec evolves. > Could you describe the use case you are wanting to support in more detail and also how this could be supported? If possible a concrete proposal in the form of a PR to the specs that shows the changes required to support this use case would help us make progress faster on this. Unfortunately, we already had a concrete proposal (with the WPCG API) that was rejected. However, I am hopefully that support for this case will actually fall out from the debates we've been having regarding passing a payment request message as separate data to the `PaymentRequest` constructor. It may turn out that ensuring we separate concerns there, that we'll once again be able to support this use case as a natural consequence. --- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/issues/35#issuecomment-212419626
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2016 13:17:16 UTC