Tuesday, 31 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should a payment method identifier (URL) resolve to a machine readable resource that describes it? (#46)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should a payment method identifier (URL) resolve to a machine readable resource that describes it? (#46)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Move PMI and Card specs out of repo (#207)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] General Comment on Registry Design (#148)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] General Comment on Registry Design (#148)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Registry Access/Handling Registry Change (#151)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Registry Access/Handling Registry Change (#151)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Terminology across all Web Payments documents should be aligned (#43)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Terminology across all Web Payments documents should be aligned (#43)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: A new document structure for this API (#138)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: A new document structure for this API (#138)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should payment method specifications contain WebIDL? (#132)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should payment method specifications contain WebIDL? (#132)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Specifying Mandatory Data (#97)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] [basic] Reference trademarks (#94)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] [basic] Reference trademarks (#94)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Specification to include Flow Diagram (#32)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Specification to include Flow Diagram (#32)
Monday, 30 May 2016
Saturday, 28 May 2016
Friday, 27 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
Thursday, 26 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix bug in updateWith algorithm that resets shippingOption (#206)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix bug in updateWith algorithm that resets shippingOption (#206)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Removing erroneous <svg> clip boundaries (#201)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Removing erroneous <svg> clip boundaries (#201)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add missing curly bracket (#202)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
Wednesday, 25 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the browser pass user data it has collected (email etc) to the payment app? (#194)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Is it neccessary to distinguish the origin of data provided in the payment response, and how would we do it? (#173)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What happens when currency of offer differs from currency of selected payment instrument? (#29)
Tuesday, 24 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the API handle pre-auth, recurring payments, and similar scenarios (#19)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the API handle pre-auth, recurring payments, and similar scenarios (#19)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update promise rejection (#187)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should API support billing address capture (for tax computation)? (#27)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Concern on Payment Method Identifier requirement (#200)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Concern on Payment Method Identifier requirement (#200)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] PROPOSAL: Payment Method Identifiers taking advantage of URL characteristics (#205)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the amount be in decimal or cents? (#204)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the amount be in decimal or cents? (#204)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
Monday, 23 May 2016
Sunday, 22 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the amount be in decimal or cents? (#204)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the amount be in decimal or cents? (#204)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the amount be in decimal or cents? (#204)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the amount be in decimal or cents? (#204)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
Saturday, 21 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Why another API? (#203)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Specification of required fields (#114)
Friday, 20 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Terms and conditions next to "Pay" button (#195)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add missing curly bracket (#202)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Removing erroneous <svg> clip boundaries (#201)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
Thursday, 19 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Concern on Payment Method Identifier requirement (#200)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Care of (#197)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] shippingAddress and "c/o" field (#186)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Care of (#197)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Address alignment (#198)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Address alignment (#198)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Care of (#197)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Address alignment (#198)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Care of (#197)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Concern on Payment Method Identifier requirement (#200)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should we define nesting/grouping semantics for payment method identifier matching? (#30)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the browser API support the concept of "messages"? (#154)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the browser API support the concept of "messages"? (#154)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Concern on Payment Method Identifier requirement (#200)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to vary amounts depending on payment method (#4)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Terms and conditions next to "Pay" button (#195)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
Wednesday, 18 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should Payment Method Identifiers and Messages be expressed using a Linked Data Vocabulary? (#45)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What component does the payment method intersection? (#103)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the browser API support the concept of "messages"? (#154)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should well-known identifiers be used for ubiquitous payment methods (#10)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the Payment Request API only be available in a top-level browsing context? (#2)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
Tuesday, 17 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Identifiers or Locators (#150)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Registry Access/Handling Registry Change (#151)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Identifiers or Locators (#150)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Registry Access/Handling Registry Change (#151)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Registry Access/Handling Registry Change (#151)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Identifiers or Locators (#150)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Identifiers or Locators (#150)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Registry Access/Handling Registry Change (#151)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Address alignment (#198)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Rename the address type since it will likely be used for other purposes. (#193)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Rename the address type since it will likely be used for other purposes. (#193)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the payment mediator pass all payment method data to the payment app or just relevant data? (#157)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Concern on Payment Method Identifier requirement (#200)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Visibility of Payment Options (#194)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Terms and conditions next to "Pay" button (#195)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Concern on Payment Method Identifier requirement (#200)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Visibility of Payment Options (#194)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Terms and conditions next to "Pay" button (#195)
Monday, 16 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Terms and conditions next to "Pay" button (#195)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Storing card information (#199)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Address alignment (#198)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Care of (#197)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] adding careOf field (#196)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] adding careOf field (#196)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Terms and conditions next to "Pay" button (#195)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
Friday, 13 May 2016
Thursday, 12 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Explain how to treat unrecognised complete values (#191)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Consider revising the design of complete() (#122)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Explain how to treat unrecognised complete values (#191)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update to method identifiers spec to use absolute URLs (#183)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update to method identifiers spec to use absolute URLs (#183)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What is the format for payment method identifiers for distributed extensibility (#11)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What is the format for payment method identifiers for distributed extensibility (#11)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What is the format for payment method identifiers for distributed extensibility (#11)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What is the format for payment method identifiers for distributed extensibility (#11)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should a payment method identifier (URL) resolve to a machine readable resource that describes it? (#46)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should API support billing address capture (for tax computation)? (#27)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Rename the address type since it will likely be used for other purposes. (#193)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should API support billing address capture (for tax computation)? (#27)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should API support billing address capture (for tax computation)? (#27)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Reject acceptPromise on abort() (#182)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Reject acceptPromise on abort() (#182)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update to method identifiers spec to use absolute URLs (#183)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update to method identifiers spec to use absolute URLs (#183)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Time validity of updateWith() (#188)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update promise rejection (#187)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update to method identifiers spec to use absolute URLs (#183)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Time validity of updateWith() (#188)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Reject acceptPromise on abort() (#182)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update promise rejection (#187)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update promise rejection (#187)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update promise rejection (#187)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update promise rejection (#187)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Time validity of updateWith() (#188)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update "user accepts the payment request algorithm" to include interaction with payment app (#192)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Reject acceptPromise on abort() (#182)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
Wednesday, 11 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Time validity of updateWith() (#188)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Explain how to treat unrecognised complete values (#191)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Change the way we request user data (#65)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Change the way we request user data (#65)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove delegated state and make abort() return a promise (#190)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Adding support for phone and email (#174)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Adding support for phone and email (#174)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the merchant be able to request your email and recipient phone number (#1)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Adding support for phone and email (#174)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] ShippingAddress versus Address (#189)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] shippingAddress and "c/o" field (#186)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
Tuesday, 10 May 2016
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Time validity of updateWith() (#188)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update promise rejection (#187)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] shippingAddress and "c/o" field (#186)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Currency Types and Rendering (#185)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Adding support for phone and email (#174)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What semantics is needed for payment method specific data? (#143)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What semantics is needed for payment method specific data? (#143)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should the payment mediator pass all payment method data to the payment app or just relevant data? (#157)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] setup CI for automatic publications with echidna (#184)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] setup CI for automatic publications with echidna (#184)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] setup CI for automatic publications with echidna (#184)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] setup CI for automatic publications with echidna (#184)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] setup CI for automatic publications with echidna (#184)
Monday, 9 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
Friday, 6 May 2016
Thursday, 5 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update to method identifiers spec to use absolute URLs (#183)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Use navigator.payments singleton, factory method, or PaymentRequest constructor (#16)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Reject acceptPromise on abort() (#182)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] BasicCardResponse: cardholderName should be optional. (#134)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] BasicCardResponse: cardholderName should be optional. (#134)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec should use [SecureContext] once that is defined in Web IDL (#22)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Reject acceptPromise on abort() (#182)
Wednesday, 4 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to provide amounts in more than one currency (#3)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Support for negative amounts (#119)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Support for negative amounts (#119)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Clarified value to use to resove [[acceptPromise]] (#181)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Clarified value to use to resove [[acceptPromise]] (#181)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Consider revising the design of complete() (#122)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Consider revising the design of complete() (#122)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Clarified value to use to resove [[acceptPromise]] (#181)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix two minor typos (#180)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix two minor typos (#180)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix two minor typos (#180)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Add support for ShippingOption.selected. (#179)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix #129 (#153)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- [w3c/browser-payment-api] Dynamic Currency Conversion (DCC) Support (#178)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Adding support for phone and email (#174)
Tuesday, 3 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Required fields (#176)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Required fields (#176)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove issue #119 note and assert that total should be non-negative (#168)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Remove issue #119 note and assert that total should be non-negative (#168)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to provide amounts in more than one currency (#3)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Required fields (#176)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should it be possible to provide amounts in more than one currency (#3)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Required fields (#176)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix #129 (#153)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Required fields (#176)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] API flow (#177)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Required fields (#176)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated examples to reflect changes in recent PRs (acf1150)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix old reference to items and use total/displayItems (41f8151)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update security and privacy considerations sections (f70fdcd)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Update security and privacy considerations sections (f70fdcd)
Monday, 2 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Adding support for phone and email (#174)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Adding support for phone and email (#174)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix #129 (#153)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Updated to use [SecureContext] extended attribute. (#172)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Required fields (#176)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What semantics is needed for payment method specific data? (#143)
Sunday, 1 May 2016
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Spec prohibits currency validation but doesn't define what it is (#175)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Should PaymentItems have a type? (#163)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Fix #129 (#153)
- Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] What is the format for payment method identifiers for distributed extensibility (#11)