Re: A first draft of the future Web Payments Interest group is available for comments

"Inventing terminology here could be quite confusing. "

+1   That's my point.

The term "electronic token" comes from UNCITRAL, the most
authoritative global body in the domain of electronic commerce.
http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/workinggroups/wg_4/wp_119_e.pdf

RE: the legality, but that’s a different issue.

Is there some advantage in W3C diverging the terminology from that
which lawyers worldwide would normally use?

Joseph





On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:46 AM, David Ezell <David_E3@verifone.com> wrote:
> Tobie Langel wrote:
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> +1.  Inventing terminology here could be quite confusing.  It’s up to
> governments to decide the legality, but that’s a different issue.
>
>
>
> From: Tobie Langel [mailto:tobie.langel@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:35 AM
> To: Joseph Potvin
> Cc: Stephane Boyera; team-webpayments-workshop-announcement@w3.org;
> public-webpaymentsigcharter@w3.org
> Subject: Re: A first draft of the future Web Payments Interest group is
> available for comments
>
>
>
> 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
>
> ________________________________
> This electronic message, including attachments, is intended only for the use
> of the individual or company named above or to which it is addressed. The
> information contained in this message shall be considered confidential and
> proprietary, and may include confidential work product. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please be aware that any unauthorized use,
> dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the
> sender by replying to this message and deleting this email immediately.



-- 
Joseph Potvin
Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
jpotvin@opman.ca
Mobile: 819-593-5983

Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:04:46 UTC