- From: Pindar Wong <pindar.wong@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 23:34:19 +0800
- To: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
- Cc: Antonio Ruiz Martínez <arm@um.es>, Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAM7BtUou3OgNLMQrm6Figr+Gt-MYJtUvXjuhYRVbKMu9veBU0A@mail.gmail.com>
Dear Adrian, all, Sorry for my late reply, but as far as the last bulletpoint, [*italics* mine] *Bridges distributed value networks*. The Web will ultimately serve as a bridge between both open and closed value exchange networks, enabling ubiquitous and easier payments. This will enable both *merchants* and *customers* to seamlessly send and receive money using a variety of previously non-interoperable payment instruments. I've probably missed something, but I read this 'bridging' aspect to focus on interoperability of value exchange networks, and suggest for your consideration that this section be reworded to: *Bridges distributed value networks*. The Web will ultimately serve as a bridge between open and closed payment networks, enabling interoperable value exchange. This will enable both* payers *and *payees* to seamlessly send and receive value using a variety of previously non-interoperable payment instruments. m2v ;) p. On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote: > Hi Antonio, > > After reading the current version of the document, I have some comments >> and suggestions that I would like to share. I hope they are useful. >> > > Thanks for your input > > >> - Regarding user experience, I would mention that the payment process >> (initiation, purchase, obtaining a receipt and the product/service) should >> be uniform so that the user can see the process is conducted in the same >> way and, thus, it generates trust to the users. I do not know if this is >> what you want to mean with "harmonizing the checkout experience across >> e-commerce websites." >> > > Yes, this is what that sentence is intending to say. Perhaps "harmonizing > the payment experience across all Web applications and sites." > > >> I would also include that it should facilitate that the user can know the >> payment options available and even the (automatic) negotiation of these >> options. >> > > Is this not covered under the bullet: "*Provides payees and payers > unencumbered knowledge and choice in how to undertake payments*"? > > >> - I would also incluse some comment on that the way of making the >> encapsulation of (new or existing) payment schemes should be uniform and >> independent of the type of payment scheme (mobile or not). >> > > I think this is implied by the fact that we are "standardizing" this > process. > > - From my point of view, I do not why know why the document needs the >> bullets "Enables monetization on the spectrum of Web to native apps" and >> "Bridges distributed value networks should part of the vision.". From my >> point of view, these issues are a consequence of "Encapsulates existing >> payment schemes and enables new schemes. " >> > > No, the first bullet you mention is explicitly talking about enabling new > business models on the Web due to the reduction in friction and cost of > payments (monetization). This speaks to things like enabling > pay-per-click/read/watch/listen media consumption or > similar which can't be easily done today because the way payments are > processed makes these business models non-viable. > > The second is explicitly calling out the need for the architecture to > allow payers and payees to make a transfer of value between one another, > even if they don't have a common payment instrument or scheme. i.e. The Web > must work like the Web is supposed to and have a mechanism to fill the gaps > and comment the two. > > >> - As for security and privacy, the sentences that mention "Supports a >> wide spectrum of security requirements and solutions" or similar should be >> reworded. Why a "wide spectrum"?. I consider that the security, privacy and >> regulatory issues have to be taken into in the development of an e-commerce >> website or e-payment solution. However, I consider that, e.g., the support >> of different authentication mechanisms is not part of the payment >> architecture. However, in the processes that are part of the payment >> process, for example, getting a payment offer, the payment architecture >> should define the mechanisms to protect this information. Then, I consider >> that in the bullet we could say that security, privacy and regulatory >> issues will be taken into account to design the different process of >> payment architecture that need to be securized. >> >> > Our intention is to propose an architecture and ultimately define some > standards. When it comes to regulation and security I think our approach is > to cater for everything we know is out there but not prescribe how > implementations are built. When it comes down to an implementer deploying a > solution in a specific jurisdiction subject to specific laws and > regulations they should not be restricted by the architecture in trying to > adhere to these. On the other hand the architecture should describe at what > points these issues come into scope and provide mechanisms to deal with > them so that we make the life of the implementer easier. > > > >> Best regards, >> Antonio. >> >> >> >> El 18/05/2015 a las 14:58, Adrian Hope-Bailie escribió: >> >>> The IG are trying to finalize a short vision statement for the work we >>> are undertaking, specifically with regards to the architecture we will >>> be developing, for payments on the Web. >>> >>> The document is intended to express the technical principles we consider >>> important in the design of the architecture and I'd appreciate some >>> input on it's content. >>> >>> The document is also intended to be short, less than a page, and as such >>> not too detailed. It's purpose is to frame the design and allow all >>> stakeholders to agree up front that we are aligned on our vision. >>> >>> The audience should be broad, and not necessarily payments or Web >>> technology experts, but since this is related to the design of a >>> technical architecture the content will be technical. >>> >>> Please have a look at the first draft of this document and send me your >>> feedback. >>> >>> https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Payment_Agent_Task_Force/Vision >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Adrian >>> >>> p.s. Thanks Ian Jacobs for the initial work in getting this started. >>> >> >> -- >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> Antonio Ruiz Martínez >> Department of Information and Communications Engineering >> Faculty of Computer Science-University of Murcia >> 30100 Murcia - Spain >> http://ants.inf.um.es/~arm/ or http://webs.um.es/arm/ >> e-mail: arm@um.es or arm [at] um [dot] es >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> > >
Received on Friday, 22 May 2015 15:34:49 UTC