Re: [browser-payment-api] Suggest two alternative payment method identifier proposals (#34)

@adrianba thanks for the write up. Since you are proposing 2, I'd like to highlight a few benefits I perceive in option 1, perhaps they can be delivered in option 2 also?

1. Equivalence of payment identifiers could perhaps be modelled via HTTP redirects, so for example http://www.w3c.org/card/visa could be shown to be equivalent to http://www.visa.com/card via an HTTP 3xx response code.

2. This same approach could be used where companies change brand names, a frequent occurrence in payments as we've seen from the Switch/Maestro investigations we've done.

3. The ability to have a resource at the URI seem to me to be so useful, that I believe it trumps the issue about inappropriate caching  of XML namespaces. I think being able to find the documentation for a given payment method at a URI is key to the ecosystem evolving. 

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/pull/34#issuecomment-195354010