- From: Tommy Thorsen <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 06:34:03 -0800
- To: w3c/webpayments-payment-apps-api <webpayments-payment-apps-api@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3c/webpayments-payment-apps-api/issues/96/275122937@github.com>
@jakearchibald > I think I get it, but could you provide a quick example (with code)? Ok, I'll give it a shot. But instead of using the boring basic card payment method, I'm going to use a hypothetical visa checkout payment app. I've taken some of the property names and values from the [visa checkout specification](https://developer.visa.com/products/visa_checkout/guides), so this is not entirely unrealistic: ```javascript var methodData = [ { supportedMethods: [ "https://secure.checkout.visa.com/pay" ], data: { apikey: "9898df897df87df987df98d7f987df", xPayToken: "xv2:" + timestamp + ":" + hashString, settings: { payment: { cardBrands: [ "VISA", "AMEX" ], acceptCanadianVisaDebit: false } } } } ] var details = { total: { label: "Total", amount: { currency: "USD", value: "100.00" } }, displayItems: [ { label: "Blue suede shoes", amount: { currency: "USD", value: "100.00" } } ], shippingOptions: [ { id: "free", label: "Free shipping!", amount: { currency: "USD", value: "0.00" } } ], modifiers: [] } var request = new PaymentRequest(methodData, details); request.show() ``` Everything inside `methodData.data` is proprietary visa checkout stuff, which the browser knows nothing about. A hypothetical `canHandle()` method provided by the visa payment app, which the user has installed in his browser, could look at the supported cardBrands and the other information in `methodData.data` and compare this with the cardBrands that the user has previously registered with visa checkout and see if there is a match. If not, then maybe the app should return false. -- 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/webpayments-payment-apps-api/issues/96#issuecomment-275122937
Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2017 14:34:59 UTC