Comment: Common Markup for Web Micropayment Systems: Take care for Telco core business!

Hello Mr. Herzberg, hello MP-List,

I think the MP-draft does not cover the core business of Telcos.

Comments
1) Telcos core business is "pay-per-tick".
   This is time-tick oriented accounting or payment.
2) Your draft covers only "pay-per-click".
   This is simmilar to "block-charge" that some Telcos do not offer.
3) I propose a change on the price data-field:
   a) call it tariff
   b) define the character string of the tariff field as follows:
      <modus><price>
      <modus>   ::= <option><duration>
      <option>  ::=
pay-per-tick|pay-per-click|pay-per-subscription|pay-per-event
      <duration>::= (as defined in duration field of the spec,
                     but with modus dependant semantics)
      <price>   ::= (as defined in price field of the spec)
4) I propose the relocation of the duration field
   a) remove it fom the fieldname list
   b) integrate duration in the character string
      as described in the "format" column
      in the newly created tariff field as decribed in 3)

General remark: If your standards body explicitely choosed
                to map pay-per-tick to pay-per-click,
                than  my proposal is obsolete.


Remak on organising the document:
I would add ordinary numbers to the fild list in chapter 4 and work
through *each* of it in 4.x. I had a hard time reading the spec because
at first I had the feeling that some field descriptions were left out
and "general notes on fields" were missing...
probably this would do it:

4      Required fields
4.1    field description
4.1.1  merchanturl
...
4.1.10 specific field
4.2    general notes on fields

with kind regards, and sorry for this late intervention,
Dieter Rüffler, T-Berkom, P14.2, rueffler@berkom.de
+49 30 3497 2592 / 2593 (fax) cellular: 0171 5674092
;-)

amir.herzberg@il.ibm.com wrote:

> Hi Dieter, looking forward to your joining the group!! Your comments
> on the
> public draft will be very welcome (use the public list for it). We are
> just
> about to close it for `last call` (maybe today) so your input is very
> timely. BTW there is some movement toward moving some of the
> standardization work to the IETF (which is an open body - no payment
> needed), you can join the list discussing this if you want.
>
> Best Regards,
> Amir Herzberg
> Manager, E-Business and Security Technologies
> IBM Research - Haifa Lab (Tel Aviv Office)
> http://www.hrl.il.ibm.com
> New e-mail: amir@il.ibm.com
> New Lotus notes mail: amir herzberg/haifa/ibm@IBMIL
>
> rueffler <d.rueffler@berkom.de> on 08/07/99 14:25:36
>
> Please respond to rueffler <d.rueffler@berkom.de>
>
> To:   Amir Herzberg/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: W3C working group