Re: W3C Web Payments Use Cases 1.0 first public draft

On 17 April 2015 at 16:16, Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:

>  On 04/16/2015 03:45 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>
>
>
> On 16 April 2015 at 18:53, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> The first public working draft of the W3C Web Payments Use Cases has
>> just been published:
>>
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/4616?pk_campaign=feed&pk_kwd=first-public-working-draft-web-payments-use-cases-1-0
>>
>> There's a blog post here covering the release:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/blog/wpig/2015/04/16/web-payments-use-cases-fpwd/
>>
>> A good chunk of the Credentials CG's work has been integrated into the
>> document, the rest is slated to be integrated during the next two months.
>>
>> This is very important progress. It demonstrates that the Web Payments
>> Interest Group is functioning in a healthy way, is producing relevant
>> material, and is moving quickly.
>>
>> Thanks to all in this group that helped make this happen over the past
>> 4+ years.
>>
>> Review comments from this group are requested. Instructions on how to
>> provide feedback can be found here:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-web-payments-use-cases-20150416/#sotd
>>
>
>  Thanks for sharing and all the effort you've put in.  Congrats on
> getting this far!
>
>  I've been prototyping and testing, a pure web standards based payment
> system, and am at a point where I'm processing about 250,000 payments a
> year, which is small scale in financial terms, but I have found quite
> useful as a learning experience.
>
> What I have found is over 99% of the payments so far, I've been working on
> are a very simple use case, namely:
>
>  Alice pays Bob <amount> <currency>
>
>  Would this be considered part of section A -- "Future Work"?  Or is this
> kind of payment covered in an existing use case, because the ones I looked
> at all look more like purchases than payments.
>
>  I'm slightly sure where my work fits into the intersection of the IG /
> CG / WG, or if it intersects at all.
>
>
> The Web Payments Use Cases document is organized into the "Phases" of
> making a payment. Each micro use case (for which there are many more to be
> added to the document), should fit into these phases. Not every step of
> each phase needs to be executed (some are optional depending on the type of
> payment). Here's an example that analyzes how Alice would pay Bob
> (person-to-person):
>
> Phase 1:
>
> Agreement on Terms - payer and payee agree on
>   - what will be purchased: "happiness"
>   - for how much: "amount"
>   - in what currency: "btc"
>   - which payment schemes are accepted: "BitCoin"
>
> Phase 2:
>
> Discovery of Accepted Schemes - bitcoin
> Selection of Payment Instruments - bitcoin
> Authentication to Access Instruments - bitcoin private key
>
> Phase 3:
>
> Initiation of Processing - payer initiates payment
> Verification of Available Funds - bitcoin protocol
> Authorization of Transfer - bitcoin protocol
> Completion of Transfer - bitcoin protocol
>
> Phase 4:
>
> Delivery of Product - money has bought happiness
> Delivery of Receipt - receipt has been delivered
>
> IMO, obvious minimal targets for standardization: payment request and
> payment receipt.
>
> I believe this case fits nicely into the use cases framework.
>

I see that this workflow is useful.

I find a payment to be thought of as a "purchase of happiness" to be
slightly contrived, maybe I could live with it tho.  What if im not
purchasing happiness, or not purchasing anything at all?


>
> --
> Dave Longley
> CTO
> Digital Bazaar, Inc.http://digitalbazaar.com
>
>