On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Stephane Boyera <boyera@w3.org> wrote: > > The case of cryptocurrencies or digital > > currencies is more problematic. i got your point, and i agree with it, > > however, this is quite a generic name, independently of the legal status of > > a currency or not isn't it? > > Is there a way we could mention these emerging payment options through the > > use of a neutral word? > > [JRP1:] A neutral term could be "electronic tokens" which can be a > type of "electronic media of exchange" regardless of whether or not > they are deemed to represent a currency in and of themselves I wonder > if anyone from the Ripple, Ven, Bitcoin+derivatives communities on > these lists might let us know if my suggestion would bother them, or > if it's a reasonable compromise considering the W3C's need (well, I > reckon it's a need) to steer clear or taking sides in the ongoing > juridical interpretations worldwide. Cryptocurrency is the commonly used terminology. Event though the IRS doesn't treat cryptocurrencies as legal currencies (which I suspect was the case you were referring to, Joseph), it still calls them virtual currencies[1]. So, I really don't think there's any issue with using cryptocurrency in the context of the charter. Quite the contrary: it's explicit. --tobie --- [1]: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-14-21.pdf
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2014 15:35:55 UTC