W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > May 2015

Re: The Payments Architecture within which a Web Payments Architecture occurs

From: Tony Camero <tonycamerobiz@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 12:17:58 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJqDFULpU+UbGMh_P_572RtAZUrqGZ-tDc5bQ7Qf7L+DRJDQ6g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Cc: Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca>, Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
At the end of the day, payments infrastructure needs to behave as natural
systems do, not as defacto governmental/financial oppressors dictate.  They
need to be an extension of Nature. Centralized control and oversight of
trade will ultimately fail, and those institutions will be washed away.
Until then, its probably just wise to design standards that enable
conformity to regulatory bodies, but don't restrict creativity and
freedom...  IMO.

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On 14 May 2015 at 18:13, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote:
>
>> RE: The docs you reference, in my mind I'd probably think of as "industry
>> patterns"
>>
>> As in (for example): "Model-Driven Design Using Business Patterns"
>> http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783540301547
>>
>
> I'm not sure if that was a question? :)
>
> From my perspective, the payments work is both almost complete, and just
> at the start.  I view the web more like an operating system such as UNIX.
> Does UNIX pose systemic risk to finance, should it be overseen by a central
> bank, probably not.
>
> Thus, the web has lots of lego pieces that you could use to build payments
> systems, which I think of as workflows and patterns.  We are at the very
> beginning of putting those pieces together.  e.g. paypal may be an example
> of this, should that have regulatory oversight, probably yes
>
>
>>
>> RE: "if deemed in scope and desirable"
>>
>> That's where it gets "interesting". At the intersection of Payments
>> Architecture and Web Architecture, it is (literally) mission critical for
>> the W3C community to bring issues that logically exist in Payments
>> Architecture space to the appropriate techical committees over there.
>> Attempting to resolve what may be considered "undesireable" Payment
>> Architecture issues directly though the Web Architecure is inevitably a
>> "work-around", which carries enormous functional and legal risk, and in any
>> case, is surely inelegant from an architectural perspective.
>>
>> In a nutshell, I'm suggesting a radical culling of W3C work-so-far in
>> this space. This should not be felt as a rejection of much of the
>> work-so-far, rather I suggest that much of the work-so-far identifies
>> exactly what the W3C community needs to bring to other standards &
>> quasi-standards bodies for consideration within their processes. The
>> elements that belong in Payments Architecture space should be brought to
>> the appropriate standards & quasi-standards bodies for consideration and
>> clarification or resolution. Ditto for the elements that belong in
>> e-Commerce Architecture space (OASIS/UBL and UNICITRAL/WG-IV most
>> prominently). The W3C IG should then make arrangements to maintain
>> proactive liaison with those bodies.
>>
>> Joseph Potvin
>> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
>> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
>> jpotvin@opman.ca
>> Mobile: 819-593-5983
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Melvin Carvalho <
>> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14 May 2015 at 17:25, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> RE: a "Payments Architecture"
>>>>
>>>> For example:
>>>> https://www.bis.org/cpmi/publ/d43.htm?
>>>> https://www.bis.org/cpmi/publ/d43.pdf
>>>>
>>>> It's been acknowledged in W3C WP discussions that ISO 20022 will need
>>>> to be engaged, but that's not all. On the e-Commece environment more
>>>> generally, I have mentioned in other posts to this list:
>>>> http://ubl.xml.org/  ...and some other core parts of the contexts in
>>>> which work on web payments must confortably sit.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ah I see.  My confusion arose around the term "architecture", to which I
>>> think of web architecture.  The docs you reference, in my mind I'd probably
>>> think of as "industry patterns".  It would be interesting to see what the
>>> overlap is there.  I believe the web can model everything in the documents
>>> referenced, if deemed in scope and desirable.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Joseph Potvin
>>>> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
>>>> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
>>>> jpotvin@opman.ca
>>>> Mobile: 819-593-5983
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Melvin Carvalho <
>>>> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 14 May 2015 at 16:59, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The issue that I'm raising is that a "Payments Architecture" in
>>>>>> general is orthogonal to the "Architecture of the World Wide Web". Any
>>>>>> architecture for "web mediated payments" needs to reference a Payments
>>>>>> Architecture that is abstracted from whatever media are employed. And any
>>>>>> architecture for "web mediated e-commerce" needs to reference an Commerce
>>>>>> Architecture that is abstracted from whatever media are employed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I may be slightly confused as to the functions of a "Payments
>>>>> Architecture", that are not covered in awww, or the ontologies.  Would you
>>>>> be able to elaborate.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Joseph Potvin
>>>>>> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
>>>>>> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
>>>>>> jpotvin@opman.ca
>>>>>> Mobile: 819-593-5983
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Melvin Carvalho <
>>>>>> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 14 May 2015 at 16:08, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would like to raise a general consideration to the CG list:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What aspects of a "Web Payments: Technical Architecture" are unique
>>>>>>>> to "Web" mediated payment, what what aspects are generic to payment via any
>>>>>>>> medium?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It seems to me that a generic payments technical architecture
>>>>>>>> provides the functional system environment within and upon which a Web
>>>>>>>> payments technical architecture occurs.  Therefore it seems to me critical
>>>>>>>> to clearly separate these two in the document.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The thought I'm attempting to underline is that a Web Payments
>>>>>>>> Technical Architecture must point to an explicit external source that
>>>>>>>> provides a generic Payments Achitecture, preferably one provided and
>>>>>>>> maintained by a genuine global standards body, or something that in effect
>>>>>>>> serves that function. The generic Payment Architecture ought to be
>>>>>>>> sufficiently refined as to be consistent across all media
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A Web Payments Technical Architecture must (I would have thought)
>>>>>>>> restrict its additive scope to that which is within the domain of the W3C,
>>>>>>>> while explicitly referencing (in its text and diagrams) the generic
>>>>>>>> Payments Achitecture that it is engaging.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Web arch is about naming things using URIs as per awww [1].  The
>>>>>>> payments work builds on that, and leverages other web technologies such as
>>>>>>> HTTP, linked data, JSON LD etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Joseph Potvin
>>>>>>>> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
>>>>>>>> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
>>>>>>>> jpotvin@opman.ca
>>>>>>>> Mobile: 819-593-5983
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Joseph Potvin
>>>>>> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
>>>>>> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
>>>>>> jpotvin@opman.ca
>>>>>> Mobile: 819-593-5983
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 14 May 2015 17:18:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:40 UTC