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

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

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 05:23:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+Eb7Qj1Zd+iH+7rq8aQefxdAGweVfGr+oFzY=SJJ-0+A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca>
Cc: Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
On 15 May 2015 at 01:59, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote:

> FWIW, even the founder of Central Banking Publications, Robert Pringle has
> being saying the current banking and finance system should be abolished and
> replaced.
> http://www.palgraveconnect.com/pc/doifinder/10.1057/9780230392755.0003?focus=true
>
> There is no "at the end of the day". The W3C has no workable choice but to
> take as given what payment systems are deemed to be in law, and how the
> governance of payment systems are regulated in law.
>

Linked Data specs tend just to be consistent ways of naming things, rather
than, implementations.  This is related to the web axiom, "the principle of
least power".  The idea is that linked data is a description language, and
not generally application logic.  It's hard to imagine that anything
illegal would creep in.  But there's an extra layer, which is the w3c
membership get to vote on it at the end, so most specs are pretty water
iight.

Implementations are a different matter, but that's not the W3C.  Just like
the web allows publishing, but the individuals is responsible for what is
published.  Code tends to leads laws in this area, and likely regulations
will evolve in line with the value propositions, exactly what has happened,
for example, with bitcoin.


>
> 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 1:17 PM, Tony Camero <tonycamerobiz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> <819-593-5983>
>
Received on Friday, 15 May 2015 03:23:46 UTC

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