Re: [browser-payment-api] Different card schemes have different mandatory field requirements (#9)

@halindrome,

Yes, we want to be able to add additional information as we see fit and use well-defined interoperable standards, not relegate extensibility to a corner. I'm not quite sure how this is going to work moving forward with the current API. It seems like we might have to repeat all of the other inputs again in the `data` section. There's another issue about combining the inputs (#15) which could enable better extensibility vs. the current mechanism, which is fairly rudimentary.

Perhaps one thing we could do in the future is add an overloaded PaymentRequest constructor that takes a payment request message (a fully extensible message that would be defined by the Messaging/HTTP API spec proposals). This message would then be forwarded to a Payment App.

---
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/9#issuecomment-200900548