Re: Some Technical Features for Web Payments

> On Nov 17, 2015, at 10:54 PM, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-11-18 07:37, Mountie Lee wrote:
>> Hi. Anders.
> Hi Mountie,
> 
>> 
>> I remember MS suggested BIG NUM feature at Web Crypto WG.
>> 
>> BIG NUM was focusing effective calculation.
> 
> Yes, if calculation is not a part of the plot you are really suggesting
> something entirely different than I thought.  Essentially you need to figure
> out the "locale" of the user.  AFAIK, there is no standardized support for that
> in browsers so you can't do this yourself (with code) and since JavaScript doesn't
> support "money numbers" there is no way it could locally format such numbers either.
> 
> Money numbers is (IMO) what's missing.
> 
>> 
>> my suggestion for formatting small number is not for calculation but for formatting.
>> 
>> trying to make small numbers more HUMAN READABLE.
>> 
>> does it make sense?
>> 
>> -------
>> 
>> for luhn check, I know it can be easily polyfilled with existing javascript.
>> but for better usage of luhn check, implemented in browser inside is better.
>> 
>> one of question I have is
>> does tokenized card(from ApplePay, SamsungPay) pass luhn check?
> 
> Well, there's not an awful lot of public information on these systems so
> I can only guess and my guess (FWIW...) is that they don't use Luhn since
> they probably use crypto for verifying a token's authenticity.

Sorry for the delay in replying, but the tokens generated by all three systems all pass the luhn check. If you happened to have a NFC reader to hand you could see this in practice. 

> 
> Regards,
> Anders
>> 
>> mountie.
>> 
>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com <mailto:anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>>    On 2015-11-18 03:34, Mountie Lee wrote:
>> 
>>        Hi.
>> 
>> 
>>    Hi Mountie,
>> 
>> 
>>        I think we need following features at Browser Level.
>> 
>>        1. Luhn Check Function
>> 
>>        if luhn check algorithm(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhn_algorithm) is implemented at UA side,
>>        it will encourage to use web payments more.
>> 
>> 
>>    If you need a Luhn check you can easily implement it in JavaScript.
>> 
>>    The bigger problem with credit-card numbers is that you often have to type them in.
>>    This is the thing that needs to go away.
>> 
>> 
>>        2. formatting Small Numbers
>>        this feature is required because of bitcoin.
>> 
>>        0.00000008 > 0.000000008
>> 
>>        it is very difficult to fiture out the differences when the number is very small
>> 
>>        at some countries use white space
>>        0.000 000 08 vs 0.000 000 008
>> 
>>        or
>> 
>>        we can format like this
>>        0.000,000,08 > 0.000,000,008
>> 
>>        actually I fail to find any global standard for small numbers.
>>        but
>>        I'm sure it will also encourage to use web payments more.
>> 
>> 
>>    There are two problems with "money numbers" in browsers:
>>    1. JSON/JavaScript does not support a BigDecimal number type.
>>    2. Display of numbers.
>> 
>>    IMO, JSON does not have to support BigDecimal but it would be nice
>>    if there were intrinsic JavaScript objects for BigDecimal.
>>    JavaScript is though defined by a specific committee known as TC-39.
>> 
>>    Regarding localized display of numbers this could also be supported
>>    by a new BigDecimal type.
>> 
>>    Note: BigDecimal a la Java is equally good for very small numbers.
>>    https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/math/BigDecimal.html
>> 
>>    Anders
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>        best regards
>>        mountie
>> 
>> 
>>        --
>>        Mountie Lee
>> 
>>        PayGate
>>        CTO, CISSP
>>        Tel : +82 2 2140 2700
>>        E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net <mailto:mountie@paygate.net> <mailto:mountie@paygate.net <mailto:mountie@paygate.net>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Mountie Lee
>> 
>> PayGate
>> CTO, CISSP
>> Tel : +82 2 2140 2700
>> E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net <mailto:mountie@paygate.net>
>> 
> 
> 

Received on Thursday, 3 December 2015 17:03:34 UTC