W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > April 2016

Re: WPWG Vendor Neutrality (was Re: Update on Web Payments Working Group)

From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 15:16:41 -0700
To: public-webpayments@w3.org
Message-ID: <57043949.4060408@sunshine.net>
On 4/5/16 1:59 PM, Joseph Potvin wrote:
> To situate my earlier comments, in many/most negotiations it's
> valuable to be psychologically and pragmatically prepared to walk.
> In the core reference on conflict resolution "Getting to Yes" [1],
> it's called your BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement)
> [2].

+1 Interesting.
And in that regard, I'd like to bring up again your earlier post with
the four suggestions for alternatives: UBL, US Fed, IETF, and UNCITRAL.

I think it might be worth familiarizing ourselves with and discussing 
these four and any others that might be added, in the big picture 
about the relationship between Identity, Web Payments, and the Web, to 
see if any are a better fit than W3C.

For myself, I went and pondered the "store-front" (web portal) of each 
of these four, and on a naive view I'd say:
UBL -- seems Web Payments focused. Seems doubtful that Identity could 
be solved there.
US Fed -- could be both Web Payments and Identity, but limited to one 
country.
IETF -- really would entail its parent organization, the ISOC. 
Possibly good for Identity, maybe less for Web Payments. 
(http://www.internetsociety.org/)
UNCITRAL -- Unsure, but possibly Identity first and Web Payments second.

Steven Rowat


> 1. Many pre-payment and post-payment data req's are effectively
> addressed by OASIS UBL http://ubl.xml.org/
>
> 2. The protocols required for moving around core messages and much
> of the info 'baggage' attached to payments are defined by the IETF.
> (For example, SWIFT's "value added" service functionality is at the
> Internet layer, not the Web layer.)
>
> 3. To some extent US Federal Reserve System functions as a
> quasi-standards body. The criteria that have been negotiated in the
> Faster Payments Task Force (though an astonishingly open and
> collaborative process) provides a good example for how this can
> work when it works well.
> https://fedpaymentsimprovement.org/faster-payments/task-force/criteria/
>
>  4. UNCITRAL WG IV on e-Commerce is working on advancing the legal
> foundations of "electronic transferable records"
> http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/commission/working_groups/4Electronic_Commerce.html
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2016 22:17:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:46 UTC