Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Identifiers or Locators (#150)

On 2016-04-25 12:46, Adrian Hope-Bailie wrote:
> You are right but that is why I think our use case is unique. The W3C
> registry has 2 functions and the latter may never materialize:
>  1. Bootstrap the ecosystem by providing the necessary pieces
>     (identifiers and specs) for common payment methods
>  2. Standardize payment methods where communities have produced a
>     variety of specs that are good candidates for standardization and do
>     this by publishing a W3C note that is a consolidated standardized
>     payment method spec.
> As such there is no need for anyone but the W3C to contribute to the
> "registry".

the general idea seems to be the same that underlies many of the IETF 
registries: define the context for an evolving ecosystem, and provide 
some way in which players in that space can figure things out as it is 
evolving. what's the rationale to *only* register initial and w3c-spec 
owned specs, instead of keeping track of the landscape (according to 
policies that you are free to define as you see fit), so that people 
have one place to go to?

keep in mind that you also wouldn't be the first to plan on supporting 
both registered and non-registered values (which can be done in a 
variety of ways, including the "magic prefix" you were mentioning):

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-registries-01#section-3.1

but again, the question then is: what's the vision behind distinguishing 
these two sets of identifiers, and why would w3c have the exclusive 
right to register?


---
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/issues/150#issuecomment-214512762