W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > December 2014

Re: Zero Click Bitcoin Micropayments using HTTP 402

From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 00:38:25 +0100
Message-ID: <54A1E5F1.60303@gmail.com>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
CC: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Web Payments <public-webpayments@w3.org>
On 2014-12-30 00:19, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>
>
> On 29 December 2014 at 19:47, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com <mailto:anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 2014-12-29 18:54, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>
>         On 12/28/14 2:05 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
>
>             In addition, I don't even think the idea using HTTP 402 actually buys you anything since it
>             has no meaning in a browser (and thus for the user) which means that there must always be
>             a *proxy* involved which does the actual work.
>
>
>         If 402 has no meaning in the browser, how does 200 magically have meaning to said browser?
>
>
>     Just to verify my claim I wrote a small Servlet that returned 402.
>     Using sendError (402) IE, Chrome and Firefox returned an error page saying that "payments are needed".
>     Using setStatus (402) the same browsers did the same thing as for 200 showed the HTML page.
>
>     None of these responses has any use for payments as far as I can tell.
>
>
> Are you expecting 4xx to do something special?  Does 404?  Or 401 or 403?

Since it doesn't do anything that you can't equally well do with 200 + suitable message
I didn't see the point with building on 402.

>
> I think this is off topic.

Ok, I thought that HTTP 402 was the actual topic.

IMO, you still owe us a description on entities and flows in your scheme.
It is completely unclear to me at least.

Example:
http://webpki.org/papers/PKI/EMV-Tokenization-SET-3DSecure-WebCryptoPlusPlus-combo.pdf#page=4


>
>
>
>         I remain quite confused about your understanding of Web Architecture.
>
>
>     I'm talking about the browser-based scheme Melvin is advocating which still
>     is completely undocumented.
>
>
>         A browser is one kind of HTTP User Agent. That's it!
>
>
>     Indeed, and I guess that is the one Melvin talked about.  If it was not
>     he should tell us.
>
>     Regards,
>     Anders
>
>
>
>         --
>         Regards,
>
>         Kingsley Idehen
>         Founder & CEO
>         OpenLink Software
>         Company Web:http://www.openlinksw.com
>         Personal Weblog 1:http://kidehen.blogspot.com
>         Personal Weblog 2:http://www.openlinksw.com/__blog/~kidehen <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen>
>         Twitter Profile:https://twitter.com/__kidehen <https://twitter.com/kidehen>
>         Google+ Profile:https://plus.google.__com/+KingsleyIdehen/about <https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about>
>         LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.__com/in/kidehen <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen>
>         Personal WebID:http://kingsley.idehen.__net/dataspace/person/kidehen#__this <http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this>
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 29 December 2014 23:38:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:37 UTC