Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Introduce transaction_id and server callback (#292)

@dlongley,

I have been thinking about HTTP API and messages spec recently. I am not sure that we need the HTTP spec. It describes how to use (vanilla) HTTPS for a particular use case, but I can think of multiple use cases and don't think we need the standard around the message flow for these use cases. Here are the use cases I was thinking of:

- A pings B to know what to pay. B tells A. A pays B. (That's what HTTP API covers today).
- A knows what to pay B so just pays B. (Use case: recurring payment to known endpoint.)
- B asks A to be paid. A pays B. (Use case: how I pay my utilities today - I am billed and I pay.)

The message spec is common to those use cases and probably others. That's why my current thinking is that the message spec should be the focus. The rest, as I understand it, is "how to get that information between parties" and that might happen in lots of different ways even beyond HTTP (e.g., push notifications) just using existing standard protocols.




-- 
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/pull/292#issuecomment-255134431