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

Sure.
Lets get the work started and we can collaborate as we go.

Have you ever managed to find a good diagram tool (like Visio, gliffy or
similar) that supports easy collaboration or saves itself in a standardises
format like XML.
Not an area I know much about as I do most of this kind of thing in Visio
but I doubt that's great for collaboration.


On 27 June 2014 05:45, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:

> 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.
>
> +1
>
> > 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).
>
> +1
>
> 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
> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/
>
>