would via not be better modelled as two transactions? Pelle Braendgaard wrote: > via would be the one to use if it's necessary. > > I personally can't see the need for it though in a TCP/IP world where > everything is in theory directly connected. > > That said I don't understand all the web credits use cases. > > P > > > > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Miller <amiller@cs.ucf.edu> wrote: > >> Is there a "via" >> >> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Pelle Braendgaard >> <pelle@stakeventures.com> wrote: >>> I've always argued it is more intuitive and follows other similar email >>> standards, which is why we use it in OpenTransact. >>> >>> I think the PaySwarm community expressed some openness to change to that >> at >>> some point. >>> >>> P >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Melvin Carvalho < >> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> I've been looking at the terms "to" and "from" wrt a transfer in >>>> webcredits / opentransact / payswarm and pingback ongologies >>>> >>>> Payswarm uses >>>> >>>> source >>>> destination >>>> >>>> Opentransact uses >>>> >>>> to >>>> from >>>> >>>> Pingback uses >>>> >>>> source >>>> target >>>> >>>> There's a slight complexity in that pingback has a "to" field to which >> is >>>> your pingback service. So there's possible collisions of named query >>>> variables a theoretical possibility. >>>> >>>> Of these 3 I think that "to" and "from" are the most intuitive, due to >>>> similarity to email / sms etc. >>>> >>>> I'm considering changing web credits to use these fields. >>>> >>>> Any thoughts? >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://picomoney.com - A whole new kind of money >>> http://payglo.be - Blog about payments from a global perspective >>> >> >> >> -- >> Andrew Miller >> > > >Received on Thursday, 29 November 2012 19:34:39 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:21 UTC