Re: Deprecation Warnings for currencies used in transaction?

Elf, Thanks for the additional clarification. That "informational" use case
still seems to me to be out-of-scope for web payments, and already
available through many other venues.

What aspect of the use case you are describing cannot be easily done or
found already?  See:
http://www.worldeconomics.com/WorldPriceIndex/WPI.efp
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/dollar-index-charts

Joseph Potvin


On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:25 AM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <
perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:

> Replies from Melvin and Joseph gave me impression that I made my point
> quite unclear. Let me try again:
>
> I don't expect Web Payments specs to take any opinionated position, but
> only provide clear way for people using it to express *their*
> opinion/intentions related to currencies they transfer. Let's maybe imagine
> adding generic property com:notice which com:Transaction could use,
> augmenting example from Web Payments spec:
>
> {
>    "type": "Transaction",
>    "id": "https://bluebank.com/transactions/20110923f72b8ca3",
>    "amount": "7.65",
>    "currency": "USD",
>    "date": "2011-09-23T20:21:35Z",
>    "notice":[
>      {
>        "type": "DeprecationWarning",
>        "id": "http://personaldataspace.me/alice/notices/80f3c350-73c4-
> 11e3-8aac-4bb3c81257e0"
>       }
>    ]
> }
>
> Having such external notice with only "@type" and "@id" embedded might
> already solve this challenge! I also assume here that transaction can only
> use single currency. Otherwise com:Transfer may fit better.
>
> Now to clarify my intention once again and provide very precise use
> scenario: (possibly TL;DR)
>
> To my understanding people using monetary currencies, based on particular
> fictional tokens (not present in physical reality, like all ISO 4217,
> Bitcoin, LETS etc.) when accepting them make assumption that someone later
> on will also accept those tokens from them in exchange for some real assets
> (present in physical reality). Such person *can't do anything else with
> such symbolic tokens other than transferring them to another peer*.
>
> It only works as long as other people choose to keep accepting those
> particular types of fictional tokens. Once less and less people accept them
> they become less and less useful since number of people who accept them in
> return for some real assets decreases.
>
> I would like to address scenarios like this one:
>
> * Given Alice has 10 000USD on her one and only 'conventional' bank account
> * And she already uses other available currencies (lets say outside of ISO
> 4217 realm)
> * And she aims to completely quit using USD within next 6 months
> (DEPRECATE)
>
> * When Alice transfers 50USD to another peer
> * And she realizes that in 6 months she will not accept USD any more
> * And she realizes that it will contribute to other people also finding
> USD less useful
> * And she wants to *play fair*
>
> * Then she honestly warns peer receiving this transfer of 50USD about her
> intentions and how they can affect this particular transfered currency
> * And she syndicates her DeprecationWarning with various public trackers
> measuring popularity of given currencies
>
> Hope I made myself easier to understand this time :)
>
> On 01/02/2014 01:33 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
>
>> Aloha o/
>>
>> I would like to work on recommendation explaining how to issue
>> deprecation warnings for currencies of one's own choice. In case someone
>> doesn't feel familiar with concept of deprecation, please just see
>> article on Wikipedia[1]
>>
>> Big part of my work in last years focuses on supporting development of
>> great diversity of currencies[2] with personal focus on non-monetary
>> currencies. Personally I already deprecated use of monetary currencies
>> over 4 years ago, and as various alternatives become more established I
>> would see such move as something everyone might realistically consider
>> to make!
>>
>> Now, to play it *fair*. I would like that people who still chose to use
>> certain currencies (especially those specified in ISO 4217[3]), and
>> already plan to quit using them in very near future, while doing so
>> could issue proper deprecation warnings. Myself I will soon strictly
>> require issuing such warnings in situations when someone uses any of ISO
>> 4217 currencies, to acquire an asset with intention of making it
>> available to me / projects I work on (eg. registering a domain name,
>> buying train ticket etc.) I consider it *not fair* to transfer certain
>> monetary currency, quit using it silently together with majority of
>> other people, and this way leave the other peer with a virtual number
>> now useless in practice...
>>
>> Looking at Web Payments: Commerce Vocabulary spec[4]. Transaction seems
>> to me like a proper place to include such warnings. At this moment one
>> could possibly only put it in plain old rdfs:comment[5] which has range
>> of rdfs:Literal. I would prefer that each warning has proper IRI and
>> links back to transaction (preferably even embedding it). Can we add
>> such feature to Commerce Vocabulary or I should look for a way to
>> shomehow extend it? PayeeRule also sounds like possible place to mention
>> it as well!
>>
>> Thank you for all suggestions :)
>>
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprecation
>> [2] http://polyeconomy.info
>> [3] http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/currency_codes.htm
>> [4] https://web-payments.org/specs/source/vocabs/commerce
>> [5]
>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-schema/
>> index.html#ch_comment
>>
>>
>>
>
>