- From: Dan Schutzer <cyberdan250@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:31:48 -0400
- To: Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca>
- Cc: Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>, Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+Hvrw0TKj=DsFhhJ5tpxdxOUNQjrmfc_sxLkygzmB07G9g7kQ@mail.gmail.com>
Could be any number of things - I could be splitting a bill and that is my share, I could be giving someone a gift or donation - there is not always an invoice. Furthermore if you want to handle payments pull then there is no invoice, such an authorization to allow a company to debit your account. Dan On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote: > If "payment initiation" were not to be described as always originating > from "an invoice", what would the WG identify as the class of business > object to specify and initiate any payment between a payer and a payee? > > Joseph Potvin > Project Coordinator > Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations > The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman > jpotvin@opman.ca > Mobile: 819-593-5983 > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joseph-potvin/2/148/423> > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com > > wrote: > >> On 16 September 2015 at 12:40, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote: >> >>> Is there agreement that: >>> >>> 1. Payment is always specified and initiated from an invoice? >>> >> >> No, I don't think that is always the case. Anyway, we have decided to >> focus purely on the payment in this WG so in future the payment initiation >> may reference an invoice but that's not a requirement. >> >>> >>> 2. UBL 2.1 provides the relevant global standard for an invoice? >>> http://ubl.xml.org/ >>> >>> Joseph Potvin >>> Project Coordinator, DataKinetics >>> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations >>> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman >>> jpotvin@opman.ca >>> Mobile: 819-593-5983 >>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joseph-potvin/2/148/423> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie < >>> adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Looking at the draft spec from Digital Bazaar for the CG and >>>> considering both, our language in the charter, and also some of the >>>> comments from the charter AC review I wondered what precedent there may be >>>> in defining how a browser should process an API call that requires >>>> interaction with the platform (host OS). >>>> >>>> The best example I could find is in the Web Notifications PR published >>>> earlier this month: >>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/PR-notifications-20150910/#displaying-notifications >>>> >>>> I would like to get the groups' (both IG and CG) views on the parallels >>>> here between the action "Displaying Notifications" from the Web >>>> Notifications recommendation and a potential "Initiating Payments" section >>>> we'd put in a recommendation from our WG. >>>> >>>> The pertinent line from the Web Notifications rec is: >>>> "Display notification on the device (*e.g. by making the appropriate >>>> notification platform API call*)." - emphasis mine. >>>> >>>> While I know not all platforms upon which browser's run today have >>>> mature "payment APIs" in the same way that they have relativley mature >>>> "notifications APIs" this open-ended approach seems appealing in that it >>>> avoids the browser needing to become complex payment processing >>>> applications. >>>> >>>> Rather, the messages passed to the navigator.payments API in the >>>> browser should simply be passed directly to the platform's payment API >>>> (following any security or privacy scrutiny or permissions checks we >>>> define). >>>> >>>> The timing seems right for us to work with the platform vendors (many >>>> of whom are also browser vendors that have expressed interest in working on >>>> this problem) to define a common vocabulary and logical messages for this >>>> flow. >>>> >>>> >>>> *Example:* >>>> On a mobile platform I see this working similarly to the way Android >>>> intents may function. The browser passes the payment initiatiation request >>>> to the platform and the user is prompted with the app selection dialogue >>>> they are accustomed to for selecting the app they want to use for that >>>> action (the same way you select which app to use when sharing a photo for >>>> example). >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>> >>> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2015 13:33:42 UTC