- From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 09:02:51 +0200
- To: Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>, public-webpayments-comments@w3.org
On 2014-10-17 23:10, Manu Sporny wrote: > We have a presentation[1] to the Web Payments Interest Group at W3C TPAC > at 11am on Monday, October 27th 2014. The goal is to introduce the new > IG members to the work we've been doing over the past 4+ years in the > Web Payments CG. We have 60 minutes allocated, with 20 minutes of > presentation and 40 minutes of discussion. > > Please review the slides and let us know if there is anything that is in > there that shouldn't be, or something that should be in there that isn't. > > https://web-payments.org/slides/2014/tpac-wpig-wpcg/ It was a nice presentation. Personally I'm worried that messages like the one I got yesterday from a payment specialist will turn out to be true: "Apple Pay is very good, both systematically and cryptographically. Additionally, they did their ecosystem homework, signing up MasterCard, Visa and Amex, and the five largest payment processors. I believe that they have in effect created the next generation of payment card. Because of the ecosystem involvement, Apple will be forced to allow this to be implemented by others so that this method becomes ubiquitous. If Apple Pay has any significant adoption in 2015, the method will quickly be spread everywhere. It will be very hard for any architecturally competing schemes to get any adoption. (Several of my friends in the payment business here in XXXXX helped Apple design Apple Pay. There are many years of payment experience embedded in its design.)" IMO, the W3C must carefully consider the value proposition of any future work so that it has a chance of getting traction. Challenging existing payment networks (and Apple) could be such an option but wouldn't that be ignored/voted down by the major platform vendors? A web interface to Apple Pay could be another venue. BTW, I think this would be trivial since the only thing you need (AFAICT...) is opening an opaque channel to the merchant web-server since the actual payment is dealt with in the phone. Regarding the Web Payment CG and IG, I see no apparent relationship since the IG seems to focus on payment initiation [1] which exclude credentials, signatures etc. because these things belong to the specific payment system itself. Cheers, Anders 1] "While the Web Payments Interest Group is not chartered to develop new payment methods, it will create a framework to ensure that Web applications can interface in a standard ways with all current and future payment methods" > > -- manu > > [1] > https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Draft_F2F_Agenda_-_TPAC_2014_-_27/28_October_2014#Day_1_.28October_27.29 >
Received on Saturday, 18 October 2014 07:03:24 UTC