Re: Web Payments IG (Steering Group) Charter - Final Call for Comments

On 07/16/2014 01:31 PM, Joseph Potvin wrote:
> David's tongue-in-cheek comment carries an element of insight that 
> ought to be addressed. Terminology does matter in communication, 
> contracting and litigation, and my thoughts are:
> 1. Neither the financial world nor the technology world need yet 
> another glossary to be maintained.


> W3C has a mandate for a certain domain of standards, but this does 
> not extend to all the terminology touched by its use cases.


> I'm only saying that the W3C is not the place for the WB or any 
> organization to introduce terminology that differs from UNCITRAL and 
> the ISO terms.


That said, I wouldn't want to see a situation where we're waiting on
UNCITRAL or ISO for years while they try to define a word for us to use
for a new electronic commerce concept around cryptocurrency. In that
case, we can mention in the spec that the terminology is non-standard
and is being defined and used in the specification until better
terminology comes along and is defined via UNCITRAL/ISO. When the better
terminology comes along, we can update the spec.

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments

Received on Wednesday, 23 July 2014 02:06:24 UTC