- 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