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

High-level architecture document (was: Re: Push payments and the high level design)

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 23:45:38 -0400
Message-ID: <53ACE8E2.6010205@digitalbazaar.com>
To: Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
Hey Adrian,

I'm pointing out two of the suggestions that you made that I think would
help us transform this useful discussion into a few action items that
would resolve most of the concerns you have.

On 06/26/2014 08:07 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie wrote:
> I have the good fortune of understanding a lot of what is written in
>  the specs, wiki and minutes of your meetings and calls but I suspect
>  many of the people we want to get involved or take interest in this
>  work don't. ... So, I suspect there is a need to provide a few 
> things to clarify the direction the group has taken and the
> direction we intend to take.
> 1. A high level diagram of the payments ecosystem and how all of the 
> work to date fits in. I am a pictures person and I think pictures are
> a great way to convey a concept especially a complex one to an 
> audience that has varied knowledge of the problem domain. Today we 
> talk about the classic four-party model in payments. Perhaps a good 
> place to start is take that diagram and add in the new stuff that has
> been proposed. I have started on a few of these but they are very
> much aligned to the OpenPayee thinking, I will share them for 
> discussion and we can adjust them to incorporate the webpayments.org
>  <http://webpayments.org> ideas.


> 2. A high level definition of the payments process including all 
> possible steps. Once we have defined that we can define which are 
> optional and focus on standardising the essential pieces first. By 
> optional, I mean optional in terms of being able to complete a 
> payment on today's terms (i.e. as simply as I described in my last 
> mail) i.e. Let's get to parity with the current status quo first but
>  knowing that we need the ability to add the extra stuff we want to 
> add next (identity exchange, terms negotiation etc).


So, let's focus on getting two items into a high-level architecture
document. We've needed one for quite a while and I'm convinced that you
have enough of a handle on what's going on here to create a rough draft
architecture document. Would you be interested in doing that? If so, I
can follow up off-line on how we write specs for this group (it's
basically just a bit of HTML editing work mixed in with a few version
control commands).

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments
Received on Friday, 27 June 2014 03:46:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:32 UTC